With respect T Boy, your tone is coming off as a little talking down. I understand that you yourself are finding it important to keep informed, but as a teacher, who's come across a broad variety of people I imagine, are you honestly saying that you really would expect EVERYONE in society to trust that three weeks means four?

 

That nobody will have kept in their mind the three week endpoint as their one light at the end of the tunnel, and that nobody at all will, if no further direction is given from the government saying otherwise on the Monday of the fourth week, assume that they can actually go and visit friends and family again?

 

I just personally feel that's unlikely, going from my own experience of literally working in communications and releasing clear guidance to all of the members of a company. People work well with exact dates, and a lot less well when what they were anticipating changes in any way. Never mind when what they were anticipating changes, and they aren't explicitly told so!

I don’t see it as that respectful to say I’m talking down to people and then immediately talk down to me. I’m not quite sure why I’m targeted here either when at least three other posters have mentioned reasons why everyone will know by Thursday that they’re waiting until Sunday for the update.

 

I never said we could expect anyone to think 3 weeks means 4 weeks. What has been said is that even if you don’t watch the news, there will be other avenues in which you can become updated.

 

Quite frankly, deciding your 3 weeks is up without checking it on the news is like deciding to go to the beach on July 20th without checking the weather.

Here in Slovenia we had 0 new confirmed infections yesterday, for the first time in two months!

That's really great news! ^_^

 

Please point me where I've talked down to you.

 

I called you out specifically because you talked about me as 'some people' where you knew that I could read it, and implied that my valid point that was taking into account the various reading and engagement abilities of the entire UK population, was me rambling as a crazy person, as if the very idea that some people might not be completely plugged into the news and switched on was ludicrous.

 

I continue to not think in the country that voted in an overwhelming majority for Brexit and for Boris Johnson that it IS definitely a fact that everyone in the country is 100% switched on.

 

To clarify, it was this post:

 

Apparently though we’re contending with people who will actively avoid any news and so will never no when it’s safe. Although the argument doesn’t stick well given the people in this hypothetical situation knew to listen to the news of a three week lockdown in the first place.

 

that I am responding to. If you thought that the argument didn't stick you could have addressed me personally and said so, instead of messaging obviously about me in the thread in front of everybody, where you knew I would see it.

Edited May 4, 20205 yr by J00psyMethyd

That’s me responding to your suggestions, not making any any jibe about you. The ‘people’ I’m referring to are the people in the hypothetical situations you and Alex p proposed, not you yourselves. Believe me, I will say things in person when I mean them, everyone on this site knows that. You can take offence, but none was offered.

 

I’m struggling with what the point of this discussion actually is. That the government should give us a date? They did, it’s Sunday. They’ve gone a round about way about it but they’ve done it. That some people choose not to look at the news? See other people’s posts about how people will become aware. That some people in the UK aren’t educated enough to follow what’s going on? I don’t believe that’s even a thing for a second. Whether you voted Tory or not, everyone knows it’s in their best interests to be aware of this situation. Even if you’re trying not to follow the news, common sense dictates that you don’t go flouting lockdown until you know it’s changed or you’re extremely pigheaded.

Edited May 4, 20205 yr by T Boy

I do wish in retrospect that the lockdown had just been a full lockdown with only trips for food and medicine allowed. I know it would have been tough but it would have been more effective and it would have been much more obvious if people were breaking the rules. If we are going to take measures to restrict people then we need them to be effective ones, unfortunately in retrospect it would seem that a lot of people in our country seem to think that they are above the rules. It's really saddening.

 

 

I do agree with those of you who are talking about clear messaging. It's so important that messages are simple and to the point if you want an entire country to abide by them, you have to target your worst case scenario individual with them. They also need to be truthful, people quickly stop believing them if they don't trust them and then they make their own rules instead.

Thanks, dandy*. That was my point, the lack of clarity.

 

T Boy - and others, the point was simply that I don't feel that saying explicitly to the populace, who are already stressed out by the lockdown and by the coronavirus, "we will extend for three weeks and will decide [implied: and inform you] whether or not to extend at the end of those three weeks." was a helpful message to send, if, at the exact end of those three weeks, a message is not given to ensure that people know that we are still actually in lockdown.

 

I would compare it to saying to a child at the start of the week 'you can have sweets this time next week' and then expecting them to understand that come that day, actually they can't have sweets. Mum has said that 'we will make an announcement about more sweets' on Sunday, but at no point has explicitly said that actually now, no, you can't have sweets on Monday, and you can't have any on the big party on Friday either - that maps in this analogy to the upcoming bank holiday.

 

There would have been no cost for the government to announce today "one more week of lockdown, and we'll be reviewing again on Sunday". But they didn't say that. The very last instruction that the public was given was that lockdown was to last for three more weeks - three weeks ago. IF - as is fairly obvious at this point, lockdown IS to be extended for this week too, then the government has a responsibility to explicitly say so, to spare confusion. ESPECIALLY as there is a bank holiday coming up, and people will be approaching it unsure whether or not they can see friends and family, given that the government has not explicitly said "guys, we are STILL IN LOCKDOWN this week."

 

My entire point is that I don't think its unreasonable when given an exact date that things will change, and when that date that things will change isn't updated by the government, that some people will believe that things actually have changed - and that perhaps, those shops that are staying closed are the ones that have it confused. After all, the government are doing a daily briefing. "If we're still in the exact same lockdown this week, wouldn't they say so then?"

Edited May 4, 20205 yr by J00psyMethyd

I do wish in retrospect that the lockdown had just been a full lockdown with only trips for food and medicine allowed. I know it would have been tough but it would have been more effective and it would have been much more obvious if people were breaking the rules. If we are going to take measures to restrict people then we need them to be effective ones, unfortunately in retrospect it would seem that a lot of people in our country seem to think that they are above the rules. It's really saddening.

I do agree with those of you who are talking about clear messaging. It's so important that messages are simple and to the point if you want an entire country to abide by them, you have to target your worst case scenario individual with them. They also need to be truthful, people quickly stop believing them if they don't trust them and then they make their own rules instead.

 

But is there any evidence this would have worked? Our numbers are pretty much very similar to Spain for example and they had a much tougher lockdown. I don't think an ultra extreme lockdown will have made much/ any difference. I think it might have even had a more negative effect. Surely the reason people are breaking the rules more is the guidelines have become more sketchy and secondly, the police might tell you off but they don't actually do anything unless it's an absurd case or you're a repeat offender..

YouGov today:

How has the government handled coronavirus testing?

Very/fairly well - 42%

Fairly/very badly - 49%

Don’t know - 9%

 

I’m surprised even that many are disapproving with the general attitude of the country or at least what feels like it.

 

Thanks to it being a one party state with a plaint media and full of 1000s upon 1000s of bots you mean?

But is there any evidence this would have worked? Our numbers are pretty much very similar to Spain for example and they had a much tougher lockdown. I don't think an ultra extreme lockdown will have made much/ any difference. I think it might have even had a more negative effect. Surely the reason people are breaking the rules more is the guidelines have become more sketchy and secondly, the police might tell you off but they don't actually do anything unless it's an absurd case or you're a repeat offender..

 

Haven't our numbers overtaken Spain though and are nearly overtaking Italy? I agree that the lockdown was extreme enough but it should have been at least a week earlier maybe more.

Haven't our numbers overtaken Spain though and are nearly overtaking Italy? I agree that the lockdown was extreme enough but it should have been at least a week earlier maybe more.

 

We have a larger population that both, but yes our numbers will overtake them. Not necessary lockdown was introduced too late, it was the mass gatherings that were the bigger issue. But I don't believe an extreme lockdown will have made things any better. Much better to compare ourselves with France as a like for like, who are doing better, but post lockdown they are making some bizarre rules up.

 

We've got to the stage now where the news has been bleak for weeks, there's no cinemas, gyms, pubs, resturaunts and I mean it's not long until Corrie/Eastenders stop airing as they have run out of episodes. Stuff has got to start opening up again otherwise the public in general will just rebel on a much larger and uncontrollable scale.

But is there any evidence this would have worked? Our numbers are pretty much very similar to Spain for example and they had a much tougher lockdown. I don't think an ultra extreme lockdown will have made much/ any difference. I think it might have even had a more negative effect. Surely the reason people are breaking the rules more is the guidelines have become more sketchy and secondly, the police might tell you off but they don't actually do anything unless it's an absurd case or you're a repeat offender..

 

I think the rules are sketchy though because there's more leniency to them and that's kinda what I meant, I think I've learnt that a fair proportion of the public will almost look for reasons to justify breaking the lockdown. The closer the message is to "you must stay at home under all circumstances", the easier it is to follow and the less loopholes people can find as excuses to justify their behaviour to themselves. Obviously it's difficult to know the exact difference a more strict lockdown would have had though, maybe those same people would have just broken it regardless.

 

My own experience has been pretty telling though, there's been a minimum of 5 houses on our close that I've seen having friends and family round during the lockdown - I even challenged one of them because I was a bit grumpy that day and they said they were "delivering medicine" which when I commented that it "totally explained why they had been sat out on the front garden together for about an hour having a barbecue" they responded that they thought they may as well stay together for a while seeing as they were there anyway. One particular house has really riled us as they've had a constant stream of friends practically every day but I guess I'm veering into personal rant territory now.

My own experience has been pretty telling though, there's been a minimum of 5 houses on our close that I've seen having friends and family round during the lockdown - I even challenged one of them because I was a bit grumpy that day and they said they were "delivering medicine" which when I commented that it "totally explained why they had been sat out on the front garden together for about an hour having a barbecue" they responded that they thought they may as well stay together for a while seeing as they were there anyway. One particular house has really riled us as they've had a constant stream of friends practically every day but I guess I'm veering into personal rant territory now.

 

So this is perhaps how there are still a few thousand new cases every day in the UK despite lockdown. I thought it was just key workers mostly getting it and some people obeying the rules being very unlucky and catching it at the supermarket on their one weekly shop.

So this is perhaps how there are still a few thousand new cases every day in the UK despite lockdown. I thought it was just key workers mostly getting it and some people obeying the rules being very unlucky and catching it at the supermarket on their one weekly shop.

 

If you look at the daily graphs the general population positives are heavily down and key workers in orange now make up the majority of the positive tests so I don’t think this is strictly true.

France are now saying their coronavirus patient zero was in December.

 

Does anyone believe this much mentioned second wave is what we’ve just been through and it was a deadlier version than the first wave in December.

I wouldn’t say it was true of everyone either Alex and alas those in question didn’t seem to get the virus! (joke)

 

It’s more a comment on the entitled and above it all attitude that my neighbours seem to have

I wouldn’t say it was true of everyone either Alex and alas those in question didn’t seem to get the virus! (joke)

 

It’s more a comment on the entitled and above it all attitude that my neighbours seem to have

 

You do hear of this happening up and down the country and it does put questions in my head such as if this is happening all over the UK and we aren’t actually locked down properly then why are the cases and hospitals not overwhelming and then brings in the question of does the lockdown need to be as strict as it is. I think the main restriction they need to review is the friends and family one given it is happening all over the country anyway whilst others are trying to stick to the rules and getting more angry by the day

You do hear of this happening up and down the country and it does put questions in my head such as if this is happening all over the UK and we aren’t actually locked down properly then why are the cases and hospitals not overwhelming and then brings in the question of does the lockdown need to be as strict as it is. I think the main restriction they need to review is the friends and family one given it is happening all over the country anyway whilst others are trying to stick to the rules and getting more angry by the day

 

It might be happening up and down the country but it's still the minority. You're probably looking at a small cumulative percentage of people who are flouting the rules. If everyone does it all at once then cases will rocket up 100%. We are locked down in the fact that your daily general routine is completely out of the window. The virus hasn't gone away just because we locked down, it's still out there. Just hold you conscience high that you did your bit for the right team and can share a positive story for the rest of our life rather than the complete idiots that flout rules like no tomorrow.

France are now saying their coronavirus patient zero was in December.

 

Does anyone believe this much mentioned second wave is what we’ve just been through and it was a deadlier version than the first wave in December.

 

I think the virus has been around in China from before October.

 

Very late to the conversation here but, unless the government says the lockdown is over, you shouldn’t be thinking the lockdown is over and therefore you should still be staying indoors. It’s not hard.

 

No one can just assume that the lockdown is over if the government doesn’t say anything straight away; you know the old saying... don’t assume, it makes an ass out of you and me.

 

Yes, a clearer communication with dates would be perfect right about now but obviously that isn’t going to happen so we need to be a bit more aware.