Matt Le Tiss

[Schad]

But what are reputable sources these days? Papers that arrange phone hacking? The BBC that doesn't have or isn't allowed to have its own opinion?

Probably not a website that exists mostly to fundraise for itself while spreading absolute nonsense. We can quibble over the Sun later.

We've all seen the high numbers of people who have died of covid(in small print within 28 days of a Covid test). I have a test twice a week, if I got hit by a bus and died, it would say I died within 28 days of a test, what is the point in telling us that?

This isn't how anything works.

How many people have actually died of Covid complications and more importantly how many people have killed themselves due to restrictions on their lives are things that we should know but do not,

We do know this, actually. Statistics for suicide are tracked pretty much worldwide. Suicides have not risen markedly.

the latter being a difficult one to gauge but surely the direct Covid deaths can be reported. Why not though? Is it because it is quite a low number?

Again, we know this, too. It's a matter of calculating excess deaths, and either COVID has and is killing an awful lot of people, or there's a serial killer who has offed millions while cleverly disguising it as pneumonic problems.

The excess deaths statistics actually say the exact opposite of what you believe: the number of deaths attributable to COVID are much, much higher than what is currently counted. As is typical with disease.

 

[Le Tissier's Laces]

But what are reputable sources these days? Papers that arrange phone hacking? The BBC that doesn't have or isn't allowed to have its own opinion? We've all seen the high numbers of people who have died of covid(in small print within 28 days of a Covid test). I have a test twice a week, if I got hit by a bus and died, it would say I died within 28 days of a test, what is the point in telling us that? How many people have actually died of Covid complications and more importantly how many people have killed themselves due to restrictions on their lives are things that we should know but do not, the latter being a difficult one to gauge but surely the direct Covid deaths can be reported. Why not though? Is it because it is quite a low number?

Surely "doesn't have or isn't allowed to have its own opinion" is what you want? Because then you're forming your own decisions and opinions based on raw factual reporting?

Though if that's what you're after, then I would suggest Reuters as your news source, rather than the BBC.

 

[Archers Road]

But what are reputable sources these days? Papers that arrange phone hacking? The BBC that doesn't have or isn't allowed to have its own opinion? We've all seen the high numbers of people who have died of covid(in small print within 28 days of a Covid test). I have a test twice a week, if I got hit by a bus and died, it would say I died within 28 days of a test, what is the point in telling us that? How many people have actually died of Covid complications and more importantly how many people have killed themselves due to restrictions on their lives are things that we should know but do not, the latter being a difficult one to gauge but surely the direct Covid deaths can be reported. Why not though? Is it because it is quite a low number?

That’s the problem isn’t it? The “reputable sources” have never been that reputable to begin with, most newspapers have an agenda which has little or nothing to do with accurately reporting the news, and the BBC has become so cowed it is now nothing more than a government mouthpiece.

All this, plus changing technology that is evolving so fast no one can keep up, is driving people to absorb even more misleading disinformation from even less reliable sources online. Worrying times, where no one believes what they’re told unless it fits their personal narrative.

 

[RedandWhiteManofKent]

Le Tiss will always be a club legend

Benali is an ambassador.

In answer to the question, it's never lo late to educate or learn.

 

[lewebster]

Probably not a website that exists mostly to fundraise for itself while spreading absolute nonsense. We can quibble over the Sun later.



This isn't how anything works.



We do know this, actually. Statistics for suicide are tracked pretty much worldwide. Suicides have not risen markedly.



Again, we know this, too. It's a matter of calculating excess deaths, and either COVID has and is killing an awful lot of people, or there's a serial killer who has offed millions while cleverly disguising it as pneumonic problems.

The excess deaths statistics actually say the exact opposite of what you believe: the number of deaths attributable to COVID are much, much higher than what is currently counted. As is typical with disease.

Well either way, the Covid deaths are not reported accurately then? Why not?

What is it that I believe? I don't even know myself so please enlighten me my friend!

 

[Schad]

Well either way, the Covid deaths are not reported accurately then? Why not?

Because a great many of the deaths happened before testing capacity had been implemented to handle the sheer number of tests needed. Case closed!

 

[SotonOldBoy]

The cancel culture is alive and kicking on the not606 Southampton forum.

 

[ChilcoSaint]

The cancel culture is alive and kicking on the not606 Southampton forum.

Any examples?

 

[The 83rd Minute]

For the vast majority of us life is simple, and we do not seek further unnecessary complications that affect our everyday lives.
But when a global event happens that affects us all we look for answers in the simplest way. The internet.
Unfortunately we find that nearly everything on the net is misinformation, absurd and far too complicated to make sense of.
We find that old American hippies with their make love not war and flower power slogans are now right wing conservatives.
We find that a lot of Jeremy Corbyn supporters were so despondent after the GE and Sturmer as leader, that they turned to American politics and found the conspiracies they had been looking for and a man called Trump to lead them.
We find online bloggers who call themselves truth seekers, have excelled themselves during lockdown preying on people’s fears and vulnerability.
We find that Twitter, Facebook, YouTube were slow to react to misinformation and by the time they banned the worst culprits it was too late the damage had been done. For most of us trying to make sense of the pandemic and lockdown it is hard to understand why conspiracy believers like MLT get reeled in hook line and sinker.
What the vast majority of us have concluded is that keeping things simple, and doing the simple things like wearing a mask, washing hands, having the vaccine and not reading online conspiracy theories is the quickest and simplest way out of a global pandemic.

 

[SR get out of my club]

Any examples?

I wouldn’t necessarily say there is a cancel culture here, but there can be times where it sails close to the mark.

How about the **** storm I had on the Politics thread?

Or when Kaito had a pop at me a few of weeks ago, when I raised the Q about how long would people give Ralph, if we kept on losing?

Or NZ Saint saying to the forum “put him on ignore, Forums a better place” when I questioned him slagging off Jankewitz for making a mistake whilst he continued to back Macca for letting in 10,000 goals in about 10 games, without anything being said by our Mods. And dont get me started on that other spineless wonder who liked the comment.

Whilst that isn’t a cancel culture, I wouldn’t say it was engaging behaviour. And all three have me on ignore, i even messaged Kaito to apologise if I’d upset him, when I was doing was raising what appears to be an unpopular Q - I didnt even went Ralph replaced ffs, I just wondered how long people thought he had.

To be honest, some of this stuff has made me disappear from here from time to time, as i didnt think it was worth it, but that is personal to me i guess, but i was feeling pretty bloody down about it for the last couple of weeks.

 

[Schad]

That isn't cancel culture. That's differing opinions. Both differences in opinions and actions having consequences long pre-date this "cancel culture" twaddle.

 

[SR get out of my club]

That isn't cancel culture. That's differing opinions. Both differences in opinions and actions having consequences long pre-date this "cancel culture" twaddle.

For the record, Power to the Billies said “I wouldn’t necessarily say there is a cancel culture here, but there can be times where it sails close to the mark”

I said it sails close to the mark, when people suggest ignoring other people to not engage, or the other stuff. As i said, not cancel, but not far from it.

Take the situation with our awful form, and Ralph. I see why people, even those on here, were Q’ng if the manager would be replaced, and I also saw the logic in keeping him.

 

[Schad]

I am sure there are people who have me on ignore. And there are people I have on ignore. That's totally fine: I can still express my opinion, and anyone who wants to can hear it. And other people can express their opinions, and if desired I can hear those too. I have not canceled them or anything close to it, and they have not caused any harm to me.

The idea that anyone is duty-bound to listen to anyone else's nonsense is just silly. Some ideas are just plain idiotic! No one should feel obligated to give them equal billing.

 

[thereisonlyoneno7]

I am sure there are people who have me on ignore. And there are people I have on ignore. That's totally fine: I can still express my opinion, and anyone who wants to can hear it. And other people can express their opinions, and if desired I can hear those too.

The idea that anyone is duty-bound to listen to anyone else's nonsense is just silly. Some ideas are just plain idiotic! No one should feel obligated to give them equal billing.

The ignore thing is weird. I am sure there are loads that have me on ignore, but I have never put anyone one here on ignore, no matter how annoying I find them or how much I disagree with them. In fact, the more I disagree the more I want to here what they say.

 

[Schad]

The ignore thing is weird. I am sure there are loads that have me on ignore, but I have never put anyone one here on ignore, no matter how annoying I find them or how much I disagree with them. In fact, the more I disagree the more I want to here what they say.

I have two people on ignore (I won't specify), and in both cases it was at least partially because I thought they might get banned if I didn't, heh.

 

[......loading......]

I didn't worship Le Tissier for his brains (or his looks for that matter). I did because he was a genius. A genius who kept possibly the worst top flight football team ever in the league for ten years on his own. Geniuses are often a bit nuts.

Someone said earlier in this thread that the club didn't owe him anything. Actually the modern club does owe him everything because we would have sunk without trace had we not stayed in the prem those early years.

Yes he is talking nonsense. Yes he could and should be removed from his club position. However, a weird opinion does nothing to blank out the pleasure he brought and the position his efforts have placed the club in.

 

[SR get out of my club]

I am sure there are people who have me on ignore. And there are people I have on ignore. That's totally fine: I can still express my opinion, and anyone who wants to can hear it. And other people can express their opinions, and if desired I can hear those too. I have not canceled them or anything close to it, and they have not caused any harm to me.

The idea that anyone is duty-bound to listen to anyone else's nonsense is just silly. Some ideas are just plain idiotic! No one should feel obligated to give them equal billing.

That’s great Schad. But no one has said literally anything about being duty bound to listen.

 

[......loading......]

That’s great Schad. But no one has said literally anything about being duty bound to listen.

Careful. If you keep replying to him you will get banned

 

[Schad]

I didn't worship Le Tissier for his brains (or his looks for that matter). I did because he was a genius. A genius who kept possibly the worst top flight football team ever in the league for ten years on his own. Geniuses are often a bit nuts.

Someone said earlier in this thread that the club didn't owe him anything. Actually the modern club does owe him everything because we would have sunk without trace had we not stayed in the prem those early years.

Yes he is talking nonsense. Yes he could and should be removed from his club position. However, a weird opinion does nothing to blank out the pleasure he brought and the position his efforts have placed the club in.

I don't think anyone wants to erase him from our history. It's mostly that people are sad that a player that most consider to be a hero keeps showing his ass on social media, because we'd much prefer to remember him for all the great things he did.

 

[......loading......]

I don't think anyone wants to erase him from our history. It's mostly that people are sad that a player that most consider to be a hero keeps showing his ass on social media, because we'd much prefer to remember him for all the great things he did.

I don't think I said anyone did want to erase him?