Posts by Rachel Jones8

urbanotter said:Most bottling plants operate as franchises, which really isn't much of an issue since the production processes and the actual formulas are already well-established.
Honestly, even if they stopped producing it entirely, I don't see it as a loss; if anything, it would probably be a win for the Americans.
I’ve never been a huge Coca-Cola fan myself—I might grab one during the summer, but I generally prefer tonic water.
At 89 years old, standing 6'3" and weighing about 200 pounds, I’m perfectly content with how things are.
I certainly don't feel like I'm missing out by not being a 300-pound die-hard Coke lover, the kind of person who doesn't consider their day a success unless they've polished off a double serving.

Are you really in your nineties?

urbanotter said:I don't have much time, but

I am simply defending the right of Russia to defend itself against those who are grabbing it by the throat and trying to choke it—something the Americans and NATO have been doing since the collapse of the USSR.
As for wheat and our supposed "self-sufficiency," that won't change the fact that we might have enough, but certainly not at prices people can actually afford.
The entire Western system is built on profiteering; whoever pays the most gets what they need.
Do you honestly believe these prices are the result of a shortage or scarcity, or are they the result of market manipulation used to dictate "commodity prices"?
Just like they are doing with energy right now, that is exactly how they will handle food.
I don't have much more to argue; just walk down to a gas station or a grocery store and you'll see this profiteering system in action.

Ukraine is just a pawn that will end up paying the highest price in this game of the West encircling itself with the NATO alliance—an alliance that claims to be defensive but isn't afraid to strike if necessary.

The Americans defend their interests thousands of miles away from their own borders rather than at home, where their borders have long been secured and surrounded by their own satellites.

Have you ever actually read American history and seen the way they have expanded their influence globally? From the war with Spain over Cuba and Puerto Rico all the way to Afghanistan.
It’s funny how they never seem to use those empty platitudes about sovereignty or a nation's right to self-determination in those cases.

Short on time?
So, what do you do for a living? 😉

He says they’re still gonna be paying out salaries.

Looks like you typed in the wrong password.
You aren't getting anything from the state, just sick leave from your employer.

If you’ve got the contact, great—but you better be local.

Nope.
Day one counts as day zero.
That’s how they handle the testing, but I’m guessing it works the same way for symptoms.

mellowskipper said:They could just scrap it. I suppose the only people rushing to get tested are those of us who haven't taken the shot—we're just desperate for some kind of official validation, I guess.
If I had been vaccinated and started feeling under the weather, I’d probably just stay home for a few days like I do with any other common cold and call it a day. I wouldn't bother testing, most likely.

Sent from my PRA-LX1 using Reddit

Do you really think your doctor would write you a note for a few days off if they aren't even sure it's COVID?
(The kind where you have to stay home for 7 or 10 days)

mellowskipper said:That’s right. That day is included. Basically, his isolation lasts until 11:59 PM on January 19th.

Sent from my Sony Xperia using Reddit

The test is on the 11th.
Quarantine is either 7 or 10 days.
Jan 11th is Day Zero.
From the 12th to the 18th is the 7-day stretch.
The 19th is when you're free.

Unless it's a 10-day isolation starting from when symptoms show up—and we don't know which day that was.
If that's the case, I'm with you: "until the 19th" means they include the 19th itself.

Looks like you're stuck in a 7-day quarantine, so you should be good to go by the 19th.

I'm not looking to get dragged into another pointless argument, so I'll just keep this quick.

Scott Long71 said:You told your truth, and she told hers. Are we really going to ban people just because they say someone is lying instead of saying they aren't telling the truth? I mean, they're basically the same thing, right?

He could just say, "I don't believe you." He's got every right to be skeptical, but calling me a liar? That's where he crosses the line.
I mean, I honestly don't get how he can claim he knows the shops in my neighborhood were open. He definitely wasn't walking around there at the same time I was, right?

What if he’s actually right and gets penalized just for telling the truth, while you're out here spreading misinformation? Does that seem fair to you? Honestly, looking at this objectively, his argument holds more water—and from what I saw firsthand, he was spot on.

You’re free to believe whoever you want, but honestly, why?
He claims the shops in his neighborhood were open and is pretty sure the whole city was running as usual. I told him that's news to me, since a few places around my way were totally closed when I went out.
The power was out in some areas, and even the cell service was totally dead...
Yeah, honestly, Scott Long71 probably knows every single shop in town better than anyone else. Right?

Stick to the actual point instead of nitpicking someone's word choice. A solid argument always carries more weight than a cheap insult, right?

There wasn't even a debate going on here. What exactly was there to talk about?
Everything was closed. Even those few shops over by my place when I finally stepped out.
There's nothing to talk about, and honestly, there isn't even anything left to discuss.

With the shops closed, the power out, phones down, and traffic backed up everywhere... and that was nothing special? Honestly, if we ever get hit by a major earthquake, I think things would just spiral into total chaos. Help probably wouldn't be nearly as organized as people like to imagine. Just my two cents, though.
I guess we could go back and forth on that, depending on how everyone feels about it. Who knows?
Whether those shops were open or not? We didn't even go there. Why bother?
Just saying "you're lying" isn't a debate. Is it?

Look, forums are built on dialogue. It’s only natural to have at least two different perspectives—two different truths. Someone's always gonna be "lying," right?

Sorry, but I’m just not buying that.
You’re actually right. He’s lying about my payroll records being processed, then turns around and accuses me of lying? I mean, how does that even work? It's not like I don't know if they were done or not.
How can anyone really know if every single shop was open around the clock?
I'm in the same boat... but I can only vouch for what I see with my own eyes. Look, I'm not saying they weren't working those hours, but when I took a stroll through my neighborhood in Springfield, I didn't see anyone shaking things up.
I trust him about his shops being open; I don't see any reason why I shouldn't.
Maybe they weren't even working by the time he finally showed up? 😉

Hey
sorry, couldn't keep it brief. 😁

Fine.
I’ll drop one more post, just to answer the accusation that I’m lying.
Is this even a discussion anymore?
And... what was my actual issue with... the conversation?
If a moderator's job isn't to judge who's lying (even when it's obvious), then shouldn't they step in when things get insulting, right?
Insults aren't allowed, as far as I know, but maybe I'm just being too sensitive about what counts as an insult. The quality of the debate tanked the second someone was called a liar—IMO, that's when action should have been taken.
Just so I learn something... if I post something like "I stopped by a couple of shops in my neighborhood and they were closed," and someone calls me a liar, am I not supposed to respond? Am I just meant to stay quiet and take it so I don't get warned to "calm down"?

edit Microsoft
Microsoft is a good moderator, I should probably mention that so it doesn't look like I'm complaining about them.
Anyway, it doesn't matter. I'll try to keep my posts to a minimum from here on out. I usually manage, but sometimes I can't help reacting when I feel something is unfair.
A lot of moderators end up driving people away from their subreddits, or at least making them want to stop posting. Microsoft isn't like that, so let's just wrap this up, because there's really no point.

Look, I definitely wasn't trying to start any drama or ramp up the tension (if there even was any, honestly). I just wrote one single reply to a post where I was being insulted. Doesn't seem like that warrants a warning, right?
I just feel like from a mod perspective, it’s not cool to sit back while someone is being insulted, and then suddenly drop a warning the moment the person accused of lying—without any proof—defends themselves.
So, it's fine to insult people and call them liars, but it's not okay to react to those posts? Because apparently, "escalating things" means I should've just stayed quiet.
I think you're a decent moderator, but everyone slips up sometimes. I think this is just one of those moments.
It feels like you don't like my response or my style, but you aren't bothered by what should have actually been an issue in the first place.
Anyway, I got my answer. It's clear I won't get the resolution I was hoping for.
Best,

Looks like there was some confusion about what I actually asked.

User A
posts the facts—after the Oklahoma City tornado, the few shops I actually stopped by were closed. I didn't claim every single store in town was shut down, nor did I say they were closed for days. I just said the specific ones I visited weren't open.

User B calls User A a liar and claims everything was running perfectly, saying he checked the shops himself and that User A is making stuff up.

The Moderator
doesn't step in, letting User B insult User A and accuse him of lying.

Then User A hits back, calling out User B’s rudeness and lack of class, while reiterating that those specific shops were indeed closed. It wasn't a lie; it was just the truth. (A few other users backed this up)

After User B’s insults, nothing happens. But once User A responds to the post where he was being attacked... suddenly, everyone gets a warning. Both the guy accusing someone of lying and the person who stood up for themselves.

What "tension" are we even talking about?
There was zero reaction to the post where I was being insulted and called a liar, but the moment I defend myself, I get warned right alongside the offender.
Should I just lower the tension?
What tension?
If responding to an attack counts as creating tension, am I just supposed to stay quiet? Just sit there while someone calls me a liar?
I speak up, and then I get a warning to "calm down."
Meanwhile, he keeps doubling down on his claims, even though several other people confirmed the shops were closed (no power, phones were down, etc.). He hasn't received any warnings at all.
It all blew up right after my post.
I don't feel like I did anything wrong, and there was no reason to drop a warning on me specifically at that exact moment.
It should have happened way earlier. Or maybe after someone responded to my post if anyone had, but not like this. It isn't fair.
So, how am I the bad guy here?

Regarding the thread about the recent Oklahoma City tornado.
A warning popped up to tone down the tension, and my name was mentioned in it.
Can the moderator please take a look at my post and my reply to it?
Some guy on here is accusing me of lying and twisting his words.
I’m responding to that post today because I feel like I have every right to speak up after being called a liar.
Instead of giving that person a warning... or a penalty... or whatever, everyone—including those of us telling the truth—is getting lumped together with the one who started this whole mess with their accusations.
Are we really supposed to just sit here quietly while someone calls us liars for no reason?

I had a driver with one of those so-called hospitality masks, which honestly serves zero purpose, especially in a taxi.
(not AMC)

Is the Plexiglas covering the whole surface? If it is, he doesn't even need a mask.

Btw, why did you say:

nimbleranger17 said:I know several people who don't own a car, and their families don't either; it's not a lifestyle choice, it's just that they're struggling financially and simply can't afford one.

So how are they supposed to get to their testing appointments? Are we expected to tell them to just trek 6.2 miles all the way to the clinic? In the middle of a freezing, miserable rainstorm when it's 30 degrees out?

You could've mentioned that there are taxis with partitions available.

Found this online.
Haven't seen it in person though.

Alexander Morgan33 said:True, you didn't say it was forbidden, but you did write that it shouldn't be done any other way than by car. So I just wrote what I was told, just so nobody would think it's actually prohibited.

Quincy:

Fair enough. You probably did the best you could in that moment. Sometimes people just don't have a choice. Though... if you were downtown and could have walked away from your friend (who was also downtown), why didn't you just walk to his place?

Because I'm sick and I don't feel well? They told me I could take a taxi. By the time I returned the car, I felt well enough to walk that stretch, and if I couldn't make it, I figured I'd just call another taxi.

Quincy:

It's good you cut down on the taxi rides... but would it really take you an hour to get from downtown to Saguache? (just asking, unrelated to the main issue)

From home to the clinic is fifteen minutes, waiting in line is ten, and the ride back is fifteen. There. It’s forty minutes, not sixty.🙄

Gotcha, I see where you're coming from.
Glad we cleared that up so everyone's on the same page.
Quincy:

Since I'm sick and feeling pretty rough? They told me I could take an Uber. By the time I dropped the car off, I felt okay enough to walk that stretch, and if I couldn't make it, I'd just call another ride.

Yeah, makes sense. Sorry if my question came off the wrong way.

Quincy:

It's about fifteen minutes from home to the clinic, ten minutes waiting in line, then another fifteen to get back. So it's 40 minutes total, not an hour.🙄

My bad... I didn't realize you weren't staying in the car but actually going in and out.

nimbleranger17 said:I know several people who don't own a car, and their families don't either; it's not a lifestyle choice, it's just that they're struggling financially and simply can't afford one.

So how are they supposed to get to their testing appointments? Are we expected to tell them to just trek 6.2 miles all the way to the clinic? In the middle of a freezing, miserable rainstorm when it's 30 degrees out?

Hopefully they at least have enough for masks and a ride. Or someone to help them out.

So, my take is... they probably calculate that $4,250 over the ten days. If there are, say, 25 working days in a month, you just divide $4,250 by 25, which works out to $170 a day. So for those ten days of quarantine, that's $567.
Then for the rest of the month, you get your standard paycheck. Let’s say someone makes $2000; divided by 25 working days, that’s $240 a day, so for the remaining 15 days, it's $3,600 total.
Total pay -> $1,700 + $3,600 = $5,300
If the salary is higher, obviously the difference is going to be bigger.

I'm not saying this is 100% certain, just how I read it. Maybe those who actually had to quarantine can weigh in and let us know if I've got this right?

Alexander Morgan33 said:Because everyone just happens to have a car?

I don't. When I started showing symptoms and called my doctor, the nurse scheduled me and told me when to head over to the Democratic Party clinic in a Small town in the US, right near Downtown. When I asked how I was supposed to get there without a vehicle, she basically told me to call a cab, wear a mask, and sit in the back behind the driver to get my testing done. Apparently, that's perfectly acceptable since it's coming directly from the person sending you to the test.

In the end, I took a cab to a friend's place Downtown, grabbed his car to drive out to the Small town in the US, then returned his car and walked home. Honestly, wearing a mask in the open air felt like a much smaller threat to passersby than being trapped in a taxi with a driver for nearly an hour.

Sent from my iPhone using Twitter

Of course they don't.
Quincy:

I don't have one. Once I started feeling sick, I called my doctor, and the nurse set up an appointment for me to head down to the local clinic in a small town in the US to get tested. When I asked how I was supposed to get there without a car, she just told me to call a taxi—wear a mask and sit in the back seat behind the driver. If that's what they tell you to do when you're being sent in for testing, who am I to argue?

I guess so. But at the end of the day, it’s just a huge headache for Uber drivers. I was just sharing my take, not saying how things ought to be.
I know someone who caught something... honestly, I have no clue where it came from, but there's a pretty good chance he picked it up from a customer.

Quincy:

Ended up grabbing a cab to a buddy's place downtown, swiped his car to get back to my small town, then just walked the rest of the way home. Honestly? I think wearing a mask in public made me way less intimidating than sitting in a taxi with a driver for nearly an hour.

For sure, you probably did the best you could with what you had at the time.
Sometimes you just don't have a choice in the matter.
I mean... if you were already Downtown and could have easily walked home from your buddy—who was also Downtown—why didn't you just walk over to him?
It's good you're cutting back on those Ubers... but does it really take you an hour to get from Downtown to a small town in the US? (Just asking, totally unrelated to what we're talking about.)

Keith Barrett2 said:What’s the amount for people on minimum wage, for example?

I was actually spiraling about this the other day—if this applies to everyone $1417, wouldn't it actually make more sense for some people to just stay home in isolation rather than even bothering to show up to work?😁

Not sure what the exact minimum is, but if you're pulling in less than $4,250, you get your full salary covered. No more, no less. Simple enough, right?

nimbleranger17 said:Honestly, showing up to the testing center by car is just peak stupidity... I know a few folks who don't even own a vehicle, and they usually end up trekking there on foot, pedaling a bike, or just grabbing an Uber... I mean, seriously, if you don't have a car, how else are you supposed to get to the testing site? It’s common sense, really.

I mean, say you just drive a housemate or someone you actually hang out with—maybe a buddy who’s finally moved on from some rough patch...
Walking or biking works fine, maybe a quick Uber if needed, but honestly, what else is there?

I don't know, it just feels wrong to me that here in NYC, everyone who's supposed to be self-isolating is out wandering around, hopping on the subway or grabbing an Uber... regardless of why they were testing in the first place.
That's a massive amount of people who could potentially be positive.