mellowskipper said:I wouldn't put them in isolation anymore. If they get sick, just let them stay home. Let kids be kids...
Sent from my PRA-LX1 using Reddit
I couldn't agree more. Honestly, this whole concept of self-isolation shouldn't have even been a thing to begin with. Think about it—so many kids have moved through preschool, kindergarten, and elementary school completely asymptomatic, passing through institutions without anyone realizing it, while some were actually spreading the virus along the way. It’s only after symptoms finally show up that we see these reactive measures—isolating a small group, a specific part of a class, or even just the one kid sitting at a certain desk. I mean, you really don't need a medical degree to see how illogical these isolation protocols are. I certainly don't remember a time when a perfectly healthy child was forced into isolation just because someone they were near fell ill.
Gerald Chavez7 said:Hold on, hold on, hold on—are you actually claiming Omicron emerged in a vaccinated Norway?
Since we're playing the "we warned you" game—Africa has been cited for at least six months as the perfect breeding ground for new variants due to low vaccination rates. Do I really need to go hunting for links to prove that?
And do you even know who the index case for Omicron was? Even with a vaccination rate of only 25%, it still ranks as the second or third most vaccinated country out of all 54 African nations.
Megan Green72 said:Yeah, sure, in theory—but I’m talking about reality here. People happily swallow whatever pills they're handed and trust the "experts" the second some doctor starts lecturing them, but the moment vaccines enter the conversation, suddenly everyone’s an expert on how corrupt and evil the system is, right?
Do you remember that deputy director over at the CDC—that guy who really stepped in the mud by comparing this whole situation to just taking some Tylenol? (And, for what it's worth, that same official claimed earlier this year that the vaccine offered 100% protection against death).
Look, I have the agency to choose whether or not I take any of those medications. That choice belongs to me. Personally, if I run a high fever, I usually let my body try to fight it off first—if things don't improve after 24 to 48 hours, then I'll step in with something. At the end of the day, without any vaccines or pills, I can still go about my life anywhere in the US. Well, except for the COVID shot.
Nicholas King said:Well, that is certainly a peculiar way of looking at things.
I had always operated under the assumption—though perhaps I'm mistaken here—that a parent acts in the best interest of their own child, rather than basing their decisions on what they deem "wrong" for that child based on others. But according to this logic, the choice to vaccinate one's offspring somehow hinges entirely on whether or not some unspecified irresponsible adults have done so.
I honestly can't wrap my head around how a child's well-being is tied to whether or not every single one of those irresponsible adults gets their shots. It’s just... I don't quite follow the reasoning where someone chooses to undergo a medical procedure instead of someone else, regardless of who that might be.
Mark Richardson86 said:Hmm... well, if you actually sit back and consider the fundamental mechanics of how a contagion spreads through a population, everything starts to make sense... which is precisely why those isolation measures were put in place in the first place...
Why do we even have these isolation rules? And should those who are vaccinated be forced into quarantine too? You have to consider that being vaccinated significantly lowers your risk of side effects—or at least makes them much more manageable—and by doing so, you're actually reducing your likelihood of passing anything on to others.
Carol Kelly3 said:I guess the point is trying to get more people vaccinated, which is really about looking out for public health. It’s kind of hard when people don't know—and it's not even their fault—what the best move is. I'm not talking about that 1% who clearly know what they're doing and are choosing to opt out. I mean the other 99% who actually want to get vaccinated but have been totally messed with by fear-mongering propaganda. Those people should be allowed to get their shots since that's what they want. In a free country like the US, people should probably have that choice, but it feels like the other side has really messed that up so far.
Could you explain to me, in plain English, how my vaccination status affects your personal health? Tell me—do you personally go out of your way to get a flu shot every single year just to look out for your fellow Americans?
Gerald Chavez7 said:Is it possible you're just confused and logged in under the wrong username? I checked, and wanderingfox86 hasn't had a single post deleted from this thread today—...not that I bothered checking anything earlier than August.
My posts were indeed deleted, but honestly, it doesn't matter much to me. I’m not one of those people who throws a tantrum thinking it happened because I personally oppose vaccination. If anyone needs proof that a post was removed, just look at how two other users referenced my previous comment—which is now nowhere to be found. And as for the idea of logging in with the "wrong" nickname—I really don't know how that would even work; I'm not quite obsessive enough about forum debates to be maintaining multiple profiles.
I am in complete agreement with those who feel that vaccines provide more benefits than harm. Susan Martin4, who did choose to get vaccinated, provided an excellent response—it was a great point, and I truly respect her perspective. On the other hand—and I can't tell if brightviper29 is just trolling here—but any line of reasoning that leans toward dictatorial systems is, for me, utterly unacceptable. People can think whatever they want, but forcing people to vaccinate is completely wrong—just as it is wrong to label everyone who chooses not to vaccinate as "anti-vaxxers." Let's be honest: those labeled as "anti-vaxxers" who fight tooth and nail to defend their specific agendas regarding vaccination are also detrimental to our society.
If someone wants to vaccinate their child, that is their choice. My own view is that neither my child nor I belong to a high-risk group, making it entirely unnecessary for us. And yes, I did vaccinate my child with the standard childhood vaccines administered after birth—because, based on evidence , the risk is near zero, and children face much more frequent negative outcomes from those actual diseases than they ever would from COVID. As for myself, being in my 30s, I don't plan on getting vaccinated—especially since I've already been infected (not just recovered, but actually had COVID). If there are 1,200 infections reported today, are all of them actually sick people? Or is it simply a case of a PCR test being roughly 90% accurate in detecting the presence of the virus?
In short, all these measures should have been lifted a long time ago—not to mention the masks in schools.
hiddendriver34 said:That logic works fine for adults. But when we talk about vaccinating kids, it’s really about boosting the overall community immunity percentage and looking out for those vulnerable groups who can't get shots themselves.
Look at countries that stayed open; they’ve hit vaccination rates as high as 95% among the elderly population.
Megan Green72 said:You're protecting those around you partially, obviously.
Now, I would appreciate it if someone could point out exactly which of my posts you are referring to. All three of my posts from today have been deleted—so, I’d like an explanation from whoever is moderating here. Why were my posts removed? Please provide some reasoning.
I’m curious to hear the perspectives of those among you—healthy young parents who choose not to vaccinate your children, and don't even bother with annual flu shots yourselves—yet you still decide to get vaccinated against COVID-19. What's the reasoning there? Why opt for the COVID-19 vaccine while opting out of the rest? Do you truly feel you're facing a significantly higher level of risk?
analogheron19 said:It’s not that they’re actually out there providing support for criminals—it’s much more calculated than that. What they’re really doing is looking out for their bosses, their executives, and their political leaders. And naturally, their priorities are always going to be centered around their own interests—things like their salaries, those sweet performance bonuses, and high-level job transfers. It’s all about self-preservation and upward mobility within the hierarchy. It’s honestly the same exact dynamic you see when members of some die-hard sports fan club blindly follow every single instruction from their group leaders—even when they don't agree with half the calls being made or the decisions being handed down... yet, they just stay part of the pack anyway. When it comes to the fans who have been around for years—those "old guard" types—they really need to take a good, hard look in the mirror. Honestly, they should probably spit at the reflection they see there before they even think about demanding anything from the players on the field.☕
Kyle Davis2 said:How can you even ask what the difference is when you've laid it all out yourself? George and his cronies from the Yankees founded, housed, funded, armed, protected, and basically employed the Fan Club as club employees. Did any of you actually stop rooting for the Dodgers during Smith's worst years? During the Golden Age? Or during the Buffett era? Or were you actually fighting to change the club? Our biggest rivals are asking why there's a sudden surge in support for the Yankees—largely thanks to people like you, whose complexes and deep-seated hatred have actually fueled this momentum, especially against you during the derbies. No further explanation should be necessary.
Trump has been 311 miles gone from Chicago for a year now—he isn't even in the US—yet various idiots are writing that the state of the club is worse than when he was in charge. How is that possible? How? We should be turning toward the positive and trying to bring the Yankees back to the fans, especially now that the fugitive is facing so many legal accusations that the BBB and ACDC have been publicly pointing out for years.
It’s easy to criticize changes within the club when you haven't won a trophy in 15 years; when your sponsor, Trump, gifted you 25% of the club's shares and stood by you the whole time; when the club hands over all the revenue from membership fees... and then you try to 'justify' every single failure as injustice (sometimes rightfully so), even though for half that time, you practically had total control over the club's direction.
I don't necessarily support the message raised during the derby. My take is short and sweet, without needing a massive dissertation: I don't think it hit the mark. Even if it was intended as a provocation, it just wasn't quite right. Besides, there is plenty of other material we can use to poke fun at them—piece by piece, rather than in a way like this.
Honestly, I couldn't have phrased it better myself. Besides, while I agree with the sentiment of this post, I would love to see a group that isn't under such intense repression from its own club and politics—a group where so many blacklists were created, and where local fans end up waiting 45 minutes at their own stadium just to be allowed out of the stands after the away fans have left. I haven't been to many games in recent years for very well-known reasons, but I truly believe this kind of situation hasn't been seen anywhere else in America.
And Brian continues to spread negativity even after all these years. If he doesn't move past this stagnant point, it would be another massive failure—especially since many regular supporters don't align with the BBB because of their uncompromising stance. Of course, the group has made bad decisions, but everyone makes mistakes. The only thing that matters is a strong and honest Yankees.
Sure, the battle with ZM is realistically lost, but the fight continues. And let it continue.
As for Red Sox Nation and their complexes, they are the direct product of this specific message and the celebration of goals. Let's just set aside the celebration of the title for the youngest generation in the North section, shall we? Is that really a championship celebration? More like a celebration of securing the title against Bell? Regardless, I respect every Yankee—whether they are celebrating this title or not, whether they were at the games, whether they are still boycotting, actively fighting, or just passively watching and waiting for better days. Everyone has their own path and life.
The only ones I don't respect are the defenders of ZM's character and actions.
And please, realize that among the people I’ve spent time with—whether I was in the stands or fighting for the club outside the stadium—there are many who agree with what is written here, and even more who hold different views. So what are they supposed to do? To you, my dear fools: I respect you, but please, think about your own situation. Hypothetically speaking, if you were in our position...
The combination of repression and boycotts really drove the supporters down to their lowest point. But now, they've returned to the stands. Ever since this season began—now that Mamić is gone, at least physically speaking—there’s been an attempt to foster a positive atmosphere to strengthen the group and bring back that old spirit. For those who believe the Bad Boys are agents or that they support the mafia in any way, I have no intention of arguing with you; frankly, you just don't get it. Does the team score own goals? Yes. Are there bad decisions made? Sure. Are there idiots within the group? Absolutely. There always have been, and there always will be. I don't necessarily agree with everything they do, but I will support this group's work as long as they remain uncompromising, honest, and—above all else—loyal to the club. You have to remember, in every fan group, every subculture, or even in society itself, there are people who are the absolute best and people who are the absolute bottom. It has never been any different, and it never will be. Life gets much easier once you accept that reality. In that same vein, I respect other groups fighting for honest football. If I stand with DTSM, then I also respect the work done by NH. That doesn't mean there won't be provocations in terms of chanting, banners, or instigating... because if fans didn't look at things through that lens, we never would have seen those matches back in 2013 where rival groups actually shared the same stands.
And yeah, sure, I’ll just go to a match and act like everything is fine. But no—it’s not about celebrating trophies or anything like that.
When people talk about boycotts—that’s just not an effective way to fight back. If we’re sitting there in the stands—why even bother showing up when the club is in this kind of state?
Everyone sees things differently, I get that. No two people have the exact same perspective on all of this. As for Dinamo? There isn't another club out there that has faced this much injustice or been treated like a plaything by everyone involved. You can debate every little detail if you want, but honestly, I’d much rather deal with a bad refereeing call anywhere else than endure what’s happening to "my" club right now. Being a Dinamo fan isn't easy.
You guys are getting into a heated debate over what is essentially just a provocative message. The whole point of these things is to stir the pot—it's always someone else's fault, isn't it? Let’s be real: the Boys are never going to praise ZM in any positive light. Personally, I am all for DTSM, but whether it's NH or the "Collapse" message, or even this one, it's all just provocation. Any rational fan out there is simply fighting for a transparent club and for the sake of football itself. We could spend our time pushing the narrative that ZG equals BG, or making jokes about the "San Diego Zoo: Etto, Chago, da Silva" back when Dinamo was bringing in foreign players while Hajduk wasn't. What are we supposed to say now, given their current roster? If you ask me, I wouldn't have gone with "Maybe it's Mamić?"—even if the intended impact was lost—but I'd have chosen something else. However, watching people create all this drama over the metaphors used in the message—while constantly complaining that they are the ones being victimized, when in reality they are mostly responsible for their own mess—is honestly laughable.
Let's be realistic: someone is going to show up here playing both sides of the fence, and frankly, both perspectives are quite difficult to dismiss—especially the first one. There will always be mistakes, and my impression is that there are more than enough of them to go around. But to exaggerate everything—particularly regarding the youth academy finals and insulting everything associated with Chicago—is nothing short of a joke.
It’s a tough spot to be in—honestly, I can't even decide myself—but if I do make it to a match, it's strictly because of the group that actually puts in the work and cares most about improving the club. It’s honestly pretty depressing when I think back to the last three seasons; I only managed to get out to Yankee Stadium four times total (during Juventus 2016, Hajduk 2017, and YB 2018). But look, on the other hand, people shouldn't mock those who work to build up the atmosphere and increase the turnout, even if the "euphoria" felt by the majority is somewhat superficial. In my opinion, we shouldn't judge the people who are genuinely fed up with everything. My only regret is that those who don't travel for away games or head down to Yankee Stadium don't at least show up for Dinamo Futsal.
It never was, and it never will be. The Bad Boys have always been a group that refuses to compromise—which is usually a massive strength, but man, does it backfire on them sometimes. We all grew up watching soccer and cheering our hearts out, but as we get older, the way we view everything changes. Back in the 80s, some of us idealized the LA Galaxy, but once we hit adulthood and faced the era of John Doe and the national team issues, people started boycotting. Then, alongside the fight to reclaim the club's identity, a new generation emerged—kids who cheered through the lean years, especially during those standout seasons following the relegation struggle, peaking around 2006. But eventually, the whole thing unraveled, and the numbers started dropping—largely because of that "with us or against us" uncompromising mentality that reached a breaking point during the boycott season of 2010/2011. Looking back at the returns to the stadium in 2011, then the games in 2013 against Savannah or Indianapolis—I can't quite recall which—then that matchup against the New York Yankees in 2016, and now here we are again... It’s easy to judge in hindsight; to me, it felt right at the time, but perhaps that season-long boycott was a tactical error. Honestly, I feel like a hypocrite. After years of coming back and becoming a true derby fanatic, I find myself sick of watching this cycle repeat. There’s a part of me that just wants to go back to the beginning—to be that arrogant kid who didn't give a damn about anything except the LA Galaxy, the crew, and the city of Chicago. But hey, some people can handle it, and some can't. Until people realize that everyone is different and carries their own unique perspective—truthfully, even I don't know what the "right" stance is anymore, other than knowing elections are vital for the club and that Jerry Maguire needs to be ousted—this friction will continue. And maybe it’s supposed to be this way. It's a struggle. Even so, I know I'll find myself rushing to another match soon because I miss that feeling. Any feeling at all. I might take a break from it for a while, but unfortunately, that's just how it goes. The Cleveland Montanian futsal team is fantastic, and I personally plan to keep showing up for them regularly, though I know for most of the crowd, that isn't the main event. So, just let the kids sing whatever they want 🙂 and don't hold it against anyone who is fighting, in their own way, for a better and more democratic LA Galaxy.
Take the white, but leave us the blue. Though, nothing will ever truly be black and white.
Barcelona vs. Atletico Madrid | Sunday, March 4th @ 4:15 PM | Odds: 2 @ 6.20
Barcelona hasn't tasted defeat yet this season—which is impressive, truly—and they’ve been playing some beautiful football. They don't have any major injuries to worry about either, but if you look closely at those last few draws, it feels like they might be hitting a bit of a plateau. Let's be realistic: they're playing in the toughest league in the world right now, and honestly, expecting them to go the whole season undefeated is probably asking too much. This feels like the perfect moment for that streak to finally snap. On the flip side, you have Atletico. I’d venture to say they’re running the best defense out there, maybe even better than Juventus. If they pull this win off, they’ll throw the entire championship race into complete chaos. And looking at the personnel—Griezmann, Carrasco, and Costa are all in fantastic form, arguably just as sharp as the trio of Messi, Coutinho, and Suarez. Because of that, the current odds feel like a massive value play. I'm leaning towards an Atletico win with Griezmann finding the net—the odds are sitting around 12, which I think is definitely worth a shot.
I haven't celebrated LA Lakers goals in years—not that I am against the Boston Red Sox, but I feel a genuine sense of regret for not being there this time. I was sitting in the stands during the Red Sox–Yankees rivalry match, and honestly, seeing the crowd chanting "I hate the Lakers" while waving flags with messages directed at the city felt like absolute rock bottom. 🙂
Alright, look—it’s fine. Honestly, we’re just creating some unnecessary generational divide here for no reason. Times change, the landscape shifts, and at the end of the day, everyone has their own perspective and their own way of seeing things. The Boys have never all thought exactly alike, yet the group has always shared the same core mission: Real Madrid comes first, and the group follows.
The younger crowd shouldn't be lecturing those who have carried this group on their backs for years—just as the inactive older generation has no business judging the youth, given how much the situation has changed. If anyone thinks they can do it better than the veterans, by all means, show up to the stands with twenty or thirty of your buddies and try to rally five hundred, seven hundred, or even a thousand people to storm the field. And once you're done dealing with the police, the security footage reviews, and all that mess, you can start collecting donations for bail and legal fees instead of funding choreographies, flags, or clubhouse space.
Just stay calm. Personally, I’m staying out of the fray since I’m mostly just following futsal these days. That’s why I think anyone who isn't actively involved shouldn't be talking too much unless they're offering some genuinely well-reasoned advice.
Manchester City vs Monaco | 2 - 6,10 SS | Feb 21, 8:45 PM (5-3)
We’ll likely see even better odds tomorrow. Honestly, Monaco is playing some incredible football right now—they might actually be the most clinical squad in all of Europe at this moment. They’re currently sitting pretty at the top of their league, holding off a powerhouse like PSG. This trip to Corsica is their first real stumble in quite a while, though. In the group stages, they managed to secure first place, including a win against Tottenham in England. Meanwhile, Manchester City finished second in their group—which was expected given Barca took the top spot—but they still finished ahead of much weaker sides like Celtic and Borussia M. While City is also on a solid run and looks sharp, I can't help but feel their defense is looking a bit too porous lately. I really think Monaco is going to carve out plenty of opportunities.
The odds here are definitely a value play; it feels worth a shot. My stake would be 3/10.