Fancy a pint?

[Phil Pascoe]

I wonder when the pub's going to reopen?

 

[sunnybob]

About 10 minutes before it closes again if the big cities are anything to go by. :shock:
Makes you wonder just how many brain cells are shared between all the "pub goers" when they wait 3 months for it to open and then crowd so close it has to shut again. :roll: :roll:
Maybe they arent alcoholics, but peopleolics? (hammer)

 

[Sheffield Tony]

Maybe they arent alcoholics, but peopleolics? (hammer)

I think you are right. We alcoholics have been happily boozing at home all along

That pub in Phil's picture is a sad scene. It is the worst thing, when out on a long walk or bike ride, to see the letters "PH" on the OS map, then to arrive at a place looking like that. So disappointing.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

There are over 30,000 pubs in the UK. It is worth having 1 in a 1000 each week having to shut down for a week or two due to CV-19 so that all can open.

It may also be a lesson to the wider public that the virus is serious - and if you behave like an ***** it may be your pub that is next in line!

 

[Rorschach]

There are over 30,000 pubs in the UK. It is worth having 1 in a 1000 each week having to shut down for a week or two due to CV-19 so that all can open.

It may also be a lesson to the wider public that the virus is serious - and if you behave like an Silly person it may be your pub that is next in line!

Almost 40,000 according to a report in Jan of this year. and only 3 closed at the moment so definitely worth the effort.

 

[lurker]

There are over 30,000 pubs in the UK. It is worth having 1 in a 1000 each week having to shut down for a week or two due to CV-19 so that all can open.

It may also be a lesson to the wider public that the virus is serious - and if you behave like an Silly person it may be your pub that is next in line!

Almost 40,000 according to a report in Jan of this year. and only 3 closed at the moment so definitely worth the effort.

Where do you get these “facts “ from?
There is a village close to me and all four pubs remain closed!
They are ten miles outside Leicester and have decided to remain closed rather than risk folks from the city descending on them.

 

[Rorschach]

Where do you get these “facts “ from?
There is a village close to me and all four pubs remain closed!
They are ten miles outside Leicester and have decided to remain closed rather than risk folks from the city descending on them.

40,000 came from a BBC article in Jan 2020, 3 pubs closed came from the BBC headlines yesterday(?).

I didn't mean 3 pubs closed across the whole country :roll:

 

[lurker]

So..... you found two totally separate facts and mashed them into the same sentence to suggest what?
It’s not difficult to see why some here, get a bit cheesed off with your opinions.

 

[Rorschach]

So..... you found two totally separate facts and mashed them into the same sentence to suggest what?
It’s not difficult to see why some here, get a bit cheesed off with your opinions.

I was responding to Terry, giving some figures to his comment.

Are you trying to find an excuse to be annoyed with me? You aren't having a go at him.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

I know I was being rather loose with the statistics - although materially correct.

The point made is with common sense caution from all, a few bars closed each week due to CV-19 is a small price to pay to keep up to 30,000+ open!

And if personally you don't like the risk - don't go.

 

[rafezetter]

So..... you found two totally separate facts and mashed them into the same sentence to suggest what?
It’s not difficult to see why some here, get a bit cheesed off with your opinions.

I was responding to Terry, giving some figures to his comment.

Are you trying to find an excuse to be annoyed with me? You aren't having a go at him.

This is why you get into trouble rorschach, inaccuracy and incongruity with what you post.

Terry posted 30,000 - your post suggests to correct that figure to 40,000, so far so good, no problems.

Where it all falls over is "and only 3 closed at the moment so definitely worth the effort", in the SAME sentence.

Saying "I didn't mean 3 pubs closed across the whole country" is bad enough without clarifying what you DID actually mean; because you added no modifier to the 3 like "in my area / town / village", thus the reader has no other choice but to assume the 40,000 and the 3 are numerically linked, such that your sentence as written and the following: "there are only 3 pubs closed out of the 40,000 nationally" are semantically the same, and there isn't a person over the age of 12 with even a middling grasp of english grammer and syntax that would disagree (except you of course.)

But you being you, you HAD to add the :roll: , which is just patronising and makes the intimation that the reader is at fault, when the fault is your bad sentence structure.

Why didn't you just say "oops sorry I didn't mean 3 in the whole country, I just meant 3 in XXXX", why be patronising and antagonistic over what might be a simple misprint?

So while he doesn't need defending, Lurker is right - you took 2 different bits of information and put them in the same sentence so it reads in a very specific (and misleading) way, and this is why you get "attacked" as you call it, because you often write things that are factually incorrect (often internally incorrect with your own previous posts) or deliberately semantically misleading, then double down and get patronising and antagonistic when you're called out for it, while intimating it's THEIR fault, not yours.

I'm not making this post to specifically attack you, though you'll ofc see it that way, it's actually constructive criticism in an attempt to point you to the WHY people react as they do, so maybe you'll pay a bit more attention, and be less misleading IF it's not intentional.

(yes yes that's rich coming from me etc etc blah blah, still doesn't make me wrong though.)

 

[Rorschach]

I know I was being rather loose with the statistics - although materially correct.

The point made is with common sense caution from all, a few bars closed each week due to CV-19 is a small price to pay to keep up to 30,000+ open!

And if personally you don't like the risk - don't go.

You were indeed and I completely agree, almost any number of temporary closures is better than all of them closed IMO.

I must confess also my post was also a little bit of an experiment that proved a theory. Sorry for unwittingly involving you in that.

 

[doctor Bob]

Fiicking hell fellas take a good long look at yourselves ............. you all look like squabbling schoolgirls.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

Fiicking hell fellas take a good long look at yourselves ............. you all look like squabbling schoolgirls.

Fortunately, they don't. The thought of that lot in mini skirts and blazers just makes me shudder. :shock:

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Fiicking hell fellas take a good long look at yourselves ............. you all look like squabbling schoolgirls.

in search of another thread to foul up?

 

[Geoff_S]

I’ve been to a lot of pubs over the years and felt really ill the next day.

They didn’t close one of them!