Coronavirus Sars-CoV-2/Covid-19 Megathread

[Maladict]

How is it possible that cruise ships are still coming back to port this late in the game? 

Not for lack of trying, they haven't been allowed into any port (or the Panama canal) for weeks.

[Sheilbh]

I thought you had been saying that if some rules are perceived as unreasonable, e.g. twit watching and Easter egg shopping, people will start to break rules they consider reasonable.  If that's not what you're saying, please tell me.

It was on this understanding that I brought up the speeding and murder analogy.

Yeah, that's not my point.

It was more if people start to perceive the quarantine rules as capricious (different from one police force to the other or police enforcing rules that don't exist), excessive, or unrelated to really stopping the quarantine - (e.g. harassing shops for stocking Easter eggs) - that will undermine support and potentially compliance with the quarantine rules. So, because I want these rules to work, the police need to be consistent and only enforcing the rules they have and if there is a move to stricter rules it needs to be really clearly explained why that's happening so that we bring the 95% of people who are complying with us.

[Admiral Yi]

Not for lack of trying, they haven't been allowed into any port (or the Panama canal) for weeks.

My point is, who the hell got *on* a cruise ship this late?  Most cruises last like 1 or 2 weeks, right?  A week or so back everyone already knew cruise ships were death traps.

And similarly how could a cruise company keep operating at that time?

[Admiral Yi]

Yeah, that's not my point.

It was more if people start to perceive the quarantine rules as capricious (different from one police force to the other or police enforcing rules that don't exist), excessive, or unrelated to really stopping the quarantine - (e.g. harassing shops for stocking Easter eggs) - that will undermine support and potentially compliance with the quarantine rules. So, because I want these rules to work, the police need to be consistent and only enforcing the rules they have and if there is a move to stricter rules it needs to be really clearly explained why that's happening so that we bring the 95% of people who are complying with us.

You say that's not your point but then type something which very much makes it sound like that is your point.

If undermining "support and potentially compliance with the quarantine rules" doesn't mean breaking rules you think are reasonable, what does it mean?

[Maladict]

Not for lack of trying, they haven't been allowed into any port (or the Panama canal) for weeks.

My point is, who the hell got *on* a cruise ship this late?  Most cruises last like 1 or 2 weeks, right?  A week or so back everyone already knew cruise ships were death traps.

And similarly how could a cruise company keep operating at that time?

This one has been at sea since March 7, if not earlier. Back when nobody outside China or Italy gave a fuck.

[Admiral Yi]

This one has been at sea since March 7, if not earlier. Back when nobody outside China or Italy gave a fuck.

gotcha

[Grey Fox]

Not for lack of trying, they haven't been allowed into any port (or the Panama canal) for weeks.

My point is, who the hell got *on* a cruise ship this late?  Most cruises last like 1 or 2 weeks, right?  A week or so back everyone already knew cruise ships were death traps.

And similarly how could a cruise company keep operating at that time?

Most, has you said we're late in the game now. These are the months long cruises trying to find a port.

[mongers]

Not for lack of trying, they haven't been allowed into any port (or the Panama canal) for weeks.

My point is, who the hell got *on* a cruise ship this late?  Most cruises last like 1 or 2 weeks, right?  A week or so back everyone already knew cruise ships were death traps.

And similarly how could a cruise company keep operating at that time?

Because some people are stupid?

Here we've had people flying out on holiday in mid March and now complaining they're stuck in Morocco or where ever, did they not watch the news, you know about the world shutting down?

[Sheilbh]

You say that's not your point but then type something which very much makes it sound like that is your point.

If undermining "support and potentially compliance with the quarantine rules" doesn't mean breaking rules you think are reasonable, what does it mean?

It undermines the perception that the rules are reasonable. I'm not sure if reasonable is quite right, but I can't think of a better way of putting it.

So it's not "this rule's being applied unreasonably/is disproportionate/etc so I'm going to break other rules that I otherwise think are reasonable", it's more "this bit of the quaranitne rule's being applied unreasonably/is disproportionate/etc so are the other parts of the quarantine also unreasonable/disproprotionate/etc?" It erodes the foundations of public support, especially if it becomes a widespread perception.

[Sheilbh]

Not for lack of trying, they haven't been allowed into any port (or the Panama canal) for weeks.

My point is, who the hell got *on* a cruise ship this late?  Most cruises last like 1 or 2 weeks, right?  A week or so back everyone already knew cruise ships were death traps.

And similarly how could a cruise company keep operating at that time?

Because some people are stupid?

Here we've had people flying out on holiday in mid March and now complaining they're stuck in Morocco or where ever, did they not watch the news, you know about the world shutting down?

Also cruise ships companies are maybe being greedy? So instead of cancelling and refunding they wait until they're forced to shut down (and can maybe get insurance?) presumably by the country of their flag - so, Panama or Greece or wherever?

[Caliga]

My dad told me they closed all the ABC (Alcoholic Beverage Control) stores in Pennsylvania.  You can buy beer and wine at groceries in PA now, but you can only get hard liquor at ABC stores.

What the hell are all the alcoholics supposed to do now?   If my dad wants whiskey he can easily drive to Jersey to get it, but PA is a fairly large state and some people live hours from the state lines.

[Admiral Yi]

It undermines the perception that the rules are reasonable. I'm not sure if reasonable is quite right, but I can't think of a better way of putting it.

So it's not "this rule's being applied unreasonably/is disproportionate/etc so I'm going to break other rules that I otherwise think are reasonable", it's more "this bit of the quaranitne rule's being applied unreasonably/is disproportionate/etc so are the other parts of the quarantine also unreasonable/disproprotionate/etc?" It erodes the foundations of public support, especially if it becomes a widespread perception.

It seems to me what you're proposing is sort of a top down approach to assessing fairness.

This rule is fair because Daddy made it, and he's a fair person.  But wait, I think this one rule is unfair.  Therefore all of Daddy's rules must be unfair.

(Is this inductive reasoning?  I wish I understood induction and deduction better.)

I on the other hand think people assess fairness from first principles.  (Deductively?)

People die from covid 19.  People contract covid 19 from human contact.  Therefore we must minimize human contact.

[Monoriu]

My dad told me they closed all the ABC (Alcoholic Beverage Control) stores in Pennsylvania.  You can buy beer and wine at groceries in PA now, but you can only get hard liquor at ABC stores.

What the hell are all the alcoholics supposed to do now?   If my dad wants whiskey he can easily drive to Jersey to get it, but PA is a fairly large state and some people live hours from the state lines.

Stockpile everything. 

[mongers]

It undermines the perception that the rules are reasonable. I'm not sure if reasonable is quite right, but I can't think of a better way of putting it.

So it's not "this rule's being applied unreasonably/is disproportionate/etc so I'm going to break other rules that I otherwise think are reasonable", it's more "this bit of the quaranitne rule's being applied unreasonably/is disproportionate/etc so are the other parts of the quarantine also unreasonable/disproprotionate/etc?" It erodes the foundations of public support, especially if it becomes a widespread perception.

It seems to me what you're proposing is sort of a top down approach to assessing fairness.

This rule is fair because Daddy made it, and he's a fair person.  But wait, I think this one rule is unfair.  Therefore all of Daddy's rules must be unfair.

(Is this inductive reasoning?  I wish I understood induction and deduction better.)

I on the other hand think people assess fairness from first principles.  (Deductively?)

People die from covid 19.  People contract covid 19 from human contact.  Therefore we must minimize human contact.

Yi, are you trying to break Shelf?

[Admiral Yi]

Yi, are you trying to break Shelf?

That's the beauty of it.  He's indestructible.