5 ms·

Frankly I'm not sure they were listening from the beginning because I read this entire editorial and I didn't see any evidence that the editorial board of the I

Frankly I'm not sure they were listening from the beginning because I read this entire editorial and I didn't see any evidence that the editorial board of the Idaho Statesman grasps the other side of the issue. > Many reasonable people are convinced that the health order actually wouldn’t have done nearly enough to slow the spread of coronavirus. And yet, here were the anti-maskers, who apparently just won’t be happy unless we have absolutely no regulations at all. Perhaps they were not enthused about the prospect of the board enacting restrictions that were considered (by many reasonable people, no less) not to have the desired effect. There might be an argument for effective restrictions but these guys are arguing for restrictions that they admit may not have done anything. Seems like both sides have lost their minds actually.

DangitBobby 6y ago
IMO, there are good arguments for keeping places open, virus be damned. But if you refuse to wear a mask and protest mask mandates, you're either selfish or an idiot. Probably both.
- chordalkeyboard 6y ago
  Its probably the case that removing people's livelihood makes them more resistant to wearing a mask.
  - DangitBobby 6y ago
    There are divisive political choices being made about how to handle the virus that unsurprisingly many people have differing opinions on. But there's really no good reason for mask wearing the be in the mix. I cannot sympathize with people who are allowing themselves to be talked into making personally and socially unhealthy choices with no upside.
    - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
      > But there's really no good reason for mask wearing the be in the mix. Thats your opinion, but the people whom you want to wear masks obviously feel differently. > I cannot sympathize with people who are allowing themselves to be talked into making personally and socially unhealthy choices with no upside. That is your personal decision. For myself, I am quite sympathetic to people who seem to be the victim of confidence artists.
      - DangitBobby 6y ago
        That's where "selfish" comes in. If they had a strong sense of social responsibility, the confidence men would have nothing to sink their claws into. But you don't need much reason or even a convincing liar to talk you into selfish or stupid behavior if you already wanted to behave stupidly or selfishly, so the confidence men are having a rather easy go of it. If these people were actually interested in doing the right thing or the best thing, they might take some steps to figure out what that is instead of swallowing whatever lines the few in power have made up about mask wearing (Personal Freedom I believe is chief among them). Then maybe we wouldn't be having this conversation. But they are too interested instead in winning whatever the fucking game we're playing is now.
        chordalkeyboard 6y ago
        > If they had a strong sense of social responsibility, the confidence men would have nothing to sink their claws into. Thats not true at all, they would simply appeal to their sense of social responsibility. > ut you don't need much reason or even a convincing liar to talk you into selfish or stupid behavior if you already wanted to behave stupidly or selfishly I don't think that people "want" to behave stupidly, they merely don't understand that the behavior is stupid. Whereas selfishness is the natural human condition and people who conform to your expectations regarding masks are also behaving selfishly according to their different selfish desires (not catching the virus, appearing to be socially responsible, appearing to conform to expectations of people they respect). > If these people were actually interested in doing the right thing or the best thing, they might take some steps to figure out what that is instead of swallowing whatever lines the few in power have made up about mask wearing Plenty of people research this topic and still disagree about which object-level conclusions are supported by evidence. Its been less than a year since the official guidance of the US CDC recommended against mask wearing. Your willingness to dismiss evidence that contradicts your perspective is exactly the same cognitive behavior they are engaging in. > But they are too interested instead in winning whatever the fucking game we're playing is now. Do you think that people who push epidemiologically ineffectual yet economically damaging lockdowns are also more concerned with winning than with public health? How do you respond to criticisms that the people who publicly support lockdowns are themselves still employed or collecting paychecks during the lockdowns and so they are willing to advocate for measures that benefit themselves to the detriment of others?

DangitBobby 6y ago

IMO, there are good arguments for keeping places open, virus be damned. But if you refuse to wear a mask and protest mask mandates, you're either selfish or an idiot. Probably both.

chordalkeyboard 6y ago
Its probably the case that removing people's livelihood makes them more resistant to wearing a mask.
- DangitBobby 6y ago
  There are divisive political choices being made about how to handle the virus that unsurprisingly many people have differing opinions on. But there's really no good reason for mask wearing the be in the mix. I cannot sympathize with people who are allowing themselves to be talked into making personally and socially unhealthy choices with no upside.
  - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
    > But there's really no good reason for mask wearing the be in the mix. Thats your opinion, but the people whom you want to wear masks obviously feel differently. > I cannot sympathize with people who are allowing themselves to be talked into making personally and socially unhealthy choices with no upside. That is your personal decision. For myself, I am quite sympathetic to people who seem to be the victim of confidence artists.
    - DangitBobby 6y ago
      That's where "selfish" comes in. If they had a strong sense of social responsibility, the confidence men would have nothing to sink their claws into. But you don't need much reason or even a convincing liar to talk you into selfish or stupid behavior if you already wanted to behave stupidly or selfishly, so the confidence men are having a rather easy go of it. If these people were actually interested in doing the right thing or the best thing, they might take some steps to figure out what that is instead of swallowing whatever lines the few in power have made up about mask wearing (Personal Freedom I believe is chief among them). Then maybe we wouldn't be having this conversation. But they are too interested instead in winning whatever the fucking game we're playing is now.
      - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
        > If they had a strong sense of social responsibility, the confidence men would have nothing to sink their claws into. Thats not true at all, they would simply appeal to their sense of social responsibility. > ut you don't need much reason or even a convincing liar to talk you into selfish or stupid behavior if you already wanted to behave stupidly or selfishly I don't think that people "want" to behave stupidly, they merely don't understand that the behavior is stupid. Whereas selfishness is the natural human condition and people who conform to your expectations regarding masks are also behaving selfishly according to their different selfish desires (not catching the virus, appearing to be socially responsible, appearing to conform to expectations of people they respect). > If these people were actually interested in doing the right thing or the best thing, they might take some steps to figure out what that is instead of swallowing whatever lines the few in power have made up about mask wearing Plenty of people research this topic and still disagree about which object-level conclusions are supported by evidence. Its been less than a year since the official guidance of the US CDC recommended against mask wearing. Your willingness to dismiss evidence that contradicts your perspective is exactly the same cognitive behavior they are engaging in. > But they are too interested instead in winning whatever the fucking game we're playing is now. Do you think that people who push epidemiologically ineffectual yet economically damaging lockdowns are also more concerned with winning than with public health? How do you respond to criticisms that the people who publicly support lockdowns are themselves still employed or collecting paychecks during the lockdowns and so they are willing to advocate for measures that benefit themselves to the detriment of others?