Coronavirus

[wadesmith]

Because it might help the economic position of your company, and therefore give you a better chance of remaining employed, rather than thinking short term and watching your company go bust.

 

Obviously when I said 'Your Company' I meant 'Your Employer"

[Plastic]

Furloughing has to be by mutual agreement so the employee can refuse but that would lead to some difficult decisions, If you were offered the full 100% why would you refuse it?

 

If I was offered 100%, I wouldn’t refuse. If I was offered £2.5k a month I would refuse and and take my 3 months severance. However in my role, this is likely a moot point.

I was simply making the point that many may not appreciate this is by mutual agreement and believe it’s a mandatory requirement.

Edited 7 April, 2020 by Plastic

[hypochondriac]

Tbh I think there should be a but if give and take from everyone involved. Yes it might be voluntary but most people I have spoken to recognise that it is not their employers fault and they are doing what they can to be accommodating under the circumstances- recognising that if they were to kick up a fuss or push for more money that the company doesn't have that there is a very real chance that everyone will lose their jobs.

[Plastic]

Tbh I think there should be a but if give and take from everyone involved. Yes it might be voluntary but most people I have spoken to recognise that it is not their employers fault and they are doing what they can to be accommodating under the circumstances- recognising that if they were to kick up a fuss or push for more money that the company doesn't have that there is a very real chance that everyone will lose their jobs.

 

Can’t disagree with that

[benjii]

Interesting to hear Whitty say that there was a lot to learn from Germany given their early and proactive testing.

 

No ****, Shurlock.

 

All the advice and expertise from people who actually know what they are doing said that was the way to go. This isn’t a revelation that has come to us now. The government chose to dither and procrastinate.

 

Still, could be worse, we could be Turkmenistan or the USA.

[benjii]

Interesting and detailed report on what has gone on in government.

 

Lots of lessons to be learned.

 

 

[special Report: Johnson listened to his scientists about coronavirus - but they were slow to sound the alarm] https://va.newsrepublic.net/al/rbjRmh

[Weston Super Saint]

That's an odd thing to say. Clearly my preference is not to get it at all but if getting it is virtually inevitable as some are suggesting, then I'd rather not get it when the virus is at its peak.

 

How is it odd? It is estimated that 80% will catch the virus. The hospitals were virtually empty last week - only just filling up this week. Ergo, there wasn't a peak last week, so the best time (even according to you!!) to have been in hospital was last week.

[egg]

Interesting and detailed report on what has gone on in government.

 

Lots of lessons to be learned.

 

 

[special Report: Johnson listened to his scientists about coronavirus - but they were slow to sound the alarm] https://va.newsrepublic.net/al/rbjRmh

Thanks for that, really interesting, and as you say there are lots of lessons to be learned.

[egg]

How is it odd? It is estimated that 80% will catch the virus. The hospitals were virtually empty last week - only just filling up this week. Ergo, there wasn't a peak last week, so the best time (even according to you!!) to have been in hospital was last week.

There's no "best time" to catch a virus that's a potential killer. I've read your comments on this matter, and I haven't got a clue what your stance is. I think you're trying to say that most of us will get it any way so carry on. Is that your point? If not, what is it?

[whelk]

How is it odd? It is estimated that 80% will catch the virus. The hospitals were virtually empty last week - only just filling up this week. Ergo, there wasn't a peak last week, so the best time (even according to you!!) to have been in hospital was last week.

 

If you spoke to anyone in the medical world and told them you wanted to catch it they would think you insane. You want to play Russian Roulette then fair enough.

[shurlock]

No ****, Shurlock.

 

All the advice and expertise from people who actually know what they are doing said that was the way to go. This isn’t a revelation that has come to us now. The government chose to dither and procrastinate.

 

Still, could be worse, we could be Turkmenistan or the USA.

 

The message is less interesting than the messenger who delivered it - in a such defensive political environment, it’s a pretty big mea culpa coming the Chief Medical Officer and someone who could have steered policy in a different direction. You have the likes of Hancock talking about the UK’s structural lack of capacity to test which may or may not be the case; but as the Reuters report makes clear, even the resources at the UK’s immediate disposal such as Weatherall Institute of Molecular Medicine weren’t being put to work when they could have made a difference.

[hypochondriac]

How is it odd? It is estimated that 80% will catch the virus. The hospitals were virtually empty last week - only just filling up this week. Ergo, there wasn't a peak last week, so the best time (even according to you!!) to have been in hospital was last week.

Because you're working in the assumption that I would want to get it in the first place. I don't.

[egg]

The message is less interesting than the messenger who delivered it - in a such defensive political environment, it’s a pretty big mea culpa coming the Chief Medical Officer and someone who could have steered policy in a different direction. You have the likes of Hancock talking about the UK’s structural lack of capacity to test which may or may not be the case; but as the Reuters report makes clear, even the resources at the UK’s immediate disposal such as Weatherall Institute of Molecular Medicine weren’t being put to work when they could have made a difference.

Yep, whilst the scientists haven't covered themselves in glory, the Reuters report makes it clear that the government have not used the resources at its disposal. We've failed to make use of countless testing facilities, not made contact with a uk ventilator supplier, stubbornly refused to participate in discussions with the EU, and failed to join in a mass EU purchase of ventilators. To what extent the government approach flows from the nature of the scientific input its hard to say, but we've not helped ourselves that's for sure.

[benjii]

Classic Dom.

[aintforever]

How is it odd? It is estimated that 80% will catch the virus. The hospitals were virtually empty last week - only just filling up this week. Ergo, there wasn't a peak last week, so the best time (even according to you!!) to have been in hospital was last week.

 

How is it odd that you would want to catch a virus that could kill you and potentially infect those close to you?!

 

**** me, you’ve spouted some nonsense on here before but that is something special. ****ing weirdo.

[hypochondriac]

How is it odd that you would want to catch a virus that could kill you and potentially infect those close to you?!

 

**** me, you’ve spouted some nonsense on here before but that is something special. ****ing weirdo.

His conclusion isn't even true anyway. If we are working on the assumption that you will definitely get it, then the best time would be as much as possible in the future when they will have learnt more about the virus, dealt with the peak of infections so are well equipped and possibly have found some anti virals which are more effective at combating it. It's a bizarre conversation to have anyway, surely everyone should be taking reasonable steps as much as possible to avoid ever getting it.

[Batman]

Beth Rigby has made a very important point this morning, given the current climate.

 

There is a distinct lack of diversity in the MPs elected to give the daily update.

Every single press conference has been conducted by a male politician as has (nearly) every media round.

 

Cheers Beth.

[Weston Super Saint]

There's no "best time" to catch a virus that's a potential killer. I've read your comments on this matter, and I haven't got a clue what your stance is. I think you're trying to say that most of us will get it any way so carry on. Is that your point? If not, what is it?

 

How is it odd that you would want to catch a virus that could kill you and potentially infect those close to you?!

 

**** me, you’ve spouted some nonsense on here before but that is something special. ****ing weirdo.

 

His conclusion isn't even true anyway. If we are working on the assumption that you will definitely get it, then the best time would be as much as possible in the future when they will have learnt more about the virus, dealt with the peak of infections so are well equipped and possibly have found some anti virals which are more effective at combating it. It's a bizarre conversation to have anyway, surely everyone should be taking reasonable steps as much as possible to avoid ever getting it.

 

Alarmist and sensationalist responses!

 

Why not consider the facts?

 

Right now, there is no known cure and no known vaccine - fact.

Scientists have calculated that 80% of the population will catch the virus, based on the fact that there is no known cure or vaccine and studies of how viruses transmit - fact (although potentially dubious as 80% seems too round, but I guess statistical modelling is about as accurate as 99% of economists!)

Four out of Five people who catch the virus (i.e. 80% of 80% of the population) will have only mild symptoms - fact

Some people will catch the virus and have no symptoms at all - fact

Death rate for someone in my age bracket is 0.4% - fact (however, that is based on the number of people dying versus the number of people who have been tested and we know that testing has been particularly poor in pretty much every country once the virus has been established to be present, so that is likely to be a figure on the high side)

 

Forgive me, as I must have missed the 'Gavyn does maths' series, but my crude calculations work out my chances of dying to be 0.00256%, or a 99.9974% chance of survival. I don't know about you, but I will happily take those odds - especially given that, statistically, the chances of someone dying in my age group, in any given year is 0.00237%, the chance of dying from Covid-19 isn't exactly a huge leap.

 

(yes, I understand that people in different age brackets and those with underlying health problems have a higher risk, some even a 15% chance of dying, but that will tend to be the 80+ year old category, who, statistically have a 14% chance of dying in any given year!)

 

So, yes, people are dying who are infected with the virus, some are even dying as a direct result of the infection, but some of your responses are a little bit mental!

 

For the record - aintforever - I've never stated that I 'want' to catch the virus, merely pointed out that the best time to have done so (given the statistical chances of dying from it), would have been last week when the hospitals were largely empty and the medical care would have been prevalent, should it have been needed at all....

[aintforever]

 

For the record - aintforever - I've never stated that I 'want' to catch the virus, merely pointed out that the best time to have done so (given the statistical chances of dying from it), would have been last week when the hospitals were largely empty and the medical care would have been prevalent, should it have been needed at all....

 

Ignoring all your other drivel, you can’t even get your timing right. If I caught the virus last week then I would only just be starting to show symptoms which means I would probably be 7 or so days from when I will need ICU treatment. Great plan, my life might rest on the chances of there being a spare ventilator in Southampton General next Wednesday.

 

Think I will just wash my hands thanks.

[egg]

Alarmist and sensationalist responses!

 

Why not consider the facts?

 

Right now, there is no known cure and no known vaccine - fact.

Scientists have calculated that 80% of the population will catch the virus, based on the fact that there is no known cure or vaccine and studies of how viruses transmit - fact (although potentially dubious as 80% seems too round, but I guess statistical modelling is about as accurate as 99% of economists!)

Four out of Five people who catch the virus (i.e. 80% of 80% of the population) will have only mild symptoms - fact

Some people will catch the virus and have no symptoms at all - fact

Death rate for someone in my age bracket is 0.4% - fact (however, that is based on the number of people dying versus the number of people who have been tested and we know that testing has been particularly poor in pretty much every country once the virus has been established to be present, so that is likely to be a figure on the high side)

 

Forgive me, as I must have missed the 'Gavyn does maths' series, but my crude calculations work out my chances of dying to be 0.00256%, or a 99.9974% chance of survival. I don't know about you, but I will happily take those odds - especially given that, statistically, the chances of someone dying in my age group, in any given year is 0.00237%, the chance of dying from Covid-19 isn't exactly a huge leap.

 

(yes, I understand that people in different age brackets and those with underlying health problems have a higher risk, some even a 15% chance of dying, but that will tend to be the 80+ year old category, who, statistically have a 14% chance of dying in any given year!)

 

So, yes, people are dying who are infected with the virus, some are even dying as a direct result of the infection, but some of your responses are a little bit mental!

 

For the record - aintforever - I've never stated that I 'want' to catch the virus, merely pointed out that the best time to have done so (given the statistical chances of dying from it), would have been last week when the hospitals were largely empty and the medical care would have been prevalent, should it have been needed at all....

 

What a load of ******. Your point is what exactly, just that the "best time" to get this has passed, and that like any sane person you don't want this stuff either. Well thanks for the insightful opinion.

 

As to the "facts". There's only one relevant fact, namely that if I get this I may or may not die. I'll do what I can to avoid that if its all the same to you. Sure, the NHS may or may not be under more pressure if / when I do, but we may also know a bit more how to treat it.

 

Today 938 people have died in the UK. Field hospitals are being built as we sit here, including one not a million miles from here. The NHS have commandeered an ice rink to site outside Portsmouth for storage purposes. Despite all that, idiots like you still suggest thay there's a benefit to getting this stuff. Perhaps, for once, dial down the nonsense and just accept that other people's right to be sensible should be respected.

Edited 8 April, 2020 by egg

[Batman]

Very important point missed in all this...

 

 

Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk

[Weston Super Saint]

What a load of ******. Your point is what exactly, just that the "best time" to get this has passed, and that like any sane person you don't want this stuff either. Well thanks for the insightful opinion.

 

As to the "facts". There's only one relevant fact, namely that if I get this I may or may not die. I'll do what I can to avoid that if its all the same to you. Sure, the NHS may or may not be under more pressure if / when I do, but we may also know a bit more how to treat it.

 

Today 938 people have died in the UK. Field hospitals are being built as we sit here, including one not a million miles from here. The NHS have commandeered an ice rink to site outside Portsmouth for storage purposes. Despite all that, idiots like you still suggest thay there's a benefit to getting this stuff. Perhaps, for once, dial down the nonsense and just accept that other people's right to be sensible should be respected.

 

Your figures are incorrect egg.

 

Today, in the region of 1400 people will die, the same as they do day in and day out - seasonal variances aside.

 

My point was that for someone in my age group, if I catch the virus - and there's a 20% chance that I won't - I have in the region of 0.4% chance of dying. Which gives me a 99.6% chance of surviving. I'm pretty happy with those odds to be fair. Certainly not enough there for me to disinfect the street outside my house, where I've probably got a higher chance of being run over, even with less traffic!

[Weston Super Saint]

Ignoring all your other drivel, you can’t even get your timing right. If I caught the virus last week then I would only just be starting to show symptoms which means I would probably be 7 or so days from when I will need ICU treatment. Great plan, my life might rest on the chances of there being a spare ventilator in Southampton General next Wednesday.

 

Think I will just wash my hands thanks.

 

Looks like you ignore quite a lot - reading comprehension not really a strong point for you?

 

Then surely you would have wanted to catch it about 2 weeks ago, thus ensuring the hospitals were all but empty 7-10 days ago should you have needed them?

[aintforever]

Looks like you ignore quite a lot - reading comprehension not really a strong point for you?

 

Doesn’t make your point any less retarded.

[Lord Duckhunter]

If I was offered 100%, I wouldn’t refuse. If I was offered £2.5k a month I would refuse and and take my 3 months severance. However in my role, this is likely a moot point.

I was simply making the point that many may not appreciate this is by mutual agreement and believe it’s a mandatory requirement.

 

I work for a large European company & about 80% of staff are furloughed. It was delayed at first (they made everyone take a weeks holiday) because the company were worried that some may insist on redundancy instead. They said they’d be looking into contracts & checking legal position. A week later they furloughed 80% of staff, there was absolutely no consultation (but they are topping up wages to 100%). Whether they’re just taking their chances or whether they are on solid ground, I don’t know. As I’m still working I didn’t receive the letter those staff did, but that letter confirmed a change of contract so that may be how they did it. There was no consultation whatsoever.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[aintforever]

My point was that for someone in my age group, if I catch the virus - and there's a 20% chance that I won't - I have in the region of 0.4% chance of dying. Which gives me a 99.6% chance of surviving. I'm pretty happy with those odds to be fair. Certainly not enough there for me to disinfect the street outside my house, where I've probably got a higher chance of being run over, even with less traffic!

 

You can tell you’re a Tory, classic ‘I’m alright Jack attitude’. Not a moments thought for the poor sod with underlying health conditions you might spread it onto.

[Weston Super Saint]

You can tell you’re a Tory, classic ‘I’m alright Jack attitude’. Not a moments thought for the poor sod with underlying health conditions you might spread it onto.

 

Again, you're making your hard of thinking assumptions once again.

 

I've mentioned numerous times on this forum that I have never voted Tory.

 

Shouldn't you be more concerned about the 'poor sod with underlying health conditions' who has decided for some unknown reason not to isolate themselves and therefore risk being infected by me - I can assure you I have no intention of seeking anyone out in their homes!

[aintforever]

Again, you're making your hard of thinking assumptions once again.

 

I've mentioned numerous times on this forum that I have never voted Tory.

 

Shouldn't you be more concerned about the 'poor sod with underlying health conditions' who has decided for some unknown reason not to isolate themselves and therefore risk being infected by me - I can assure you I have no intention of seeking anyone out in their homes!

 

You are obviously thick as **** if you don’t understand how the more it spreads the more vulnerable people are put at risk.

[SO16_Saint]

Good luck, hope all is ok. We have some retail customers who have furloughed the majority of their staff, but all have had their pay made up to 100% by the employer.

I believe as an employee you have the right to refuse, which would leave the business needing to either retain you, renegotiate your role, or serve you notice. Some of these options may be preferable dependant in the furlough package you are offered.

 

Quick update that they will cover 90% of full salary.

 

I want furlough all of a sudden...

[egg]

Your figures are incorrect egg.

 

Today, in the region of 1400 people will die, the same as they do day in and day out - seasonal variances aside.

 

My point was that for someone in my age group, if I catch the virus - and there's a 20% chance that I won't - I have in the region of 0.4% chance of dying. Which gives me a 99.6% chance of surviving. I'm pretty happy with those odds to be fair. Certainly not enough there for me to disinfect the street outside my house, where I've probably got a higher chance of being run over, even with less traffic!

 

Don't be obtuse. "Normal death" count is irrelevant. Its the covid deaths I referred to, you know that. Take your chances pal, but believe it or not, we're not all selfish cvnts willing to take our chances and in doing so potentially infect others.

[Weston Super Saint]

You are obviously thick as **** if you don’t understand how the more it spreads the more vulnerable people are put at risk.

 

Vulnerable people who should be isolating, because they're, you know, vulnerable.

 

Unless you're unsure of what the word 'isolating' means?

[Weston Super Saint]

Don't be obtuse. "Normal death" count is irrelevant. Its the covid deaths I referred to, you know that. Take your chances pal, but believe it or not, we're not all selfish cvnts willing to take our chances and in doing so potentially infect others.

 

Jesus wept!

 

Please let me know where you are getting that information from about 'covid deaths'. The BBC are reporting "a record 938 daily deaths were reported in UK hospitals." : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52221724 But they are very careful to not state that these were caused explicitly by covid, as far as I can tell, that is just your assumption.

 

It's been discussed before that as a 'reportable' disease, any death that occurs whilst 'infected' has to be reported to the WHO, which means, essentially you could bleed to death whilst infected and it will be reported, but the cause of death will be lack of blood!

 

I'm more than happy to be proven wrong - and have stated this more than once on this thread - and will be more than happy to look at any publication that is giving figures for deaths above and beyond the natural death rate, however, from everything I've read, this is not being reported. Enlighten me, show me the full facts and figures, pal.

[Whitey Grandad]

I work for a large European company & about 80% of staff are furloughed. It was delayed at first (they made everyone take a weeks holiday) because the company were worried that some may insist on redundancy instead. They said they’d be looking into contracts & checking legal position. A week later they furloughed 80% of staff, there was absolutely no consultation (but they are topping up wages to 100%). Whether they’re just taking their chances or whether they are on solid ground, I don’t know. As I’m still working I didn’t receive the letter those staff did, but that letter confirmed a change of contract so that may be how they did it. There was no consultation whatsoever.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

No consultation? There has to be agreement by both parties. I would say that they are on shaky ground.

[Weston Super Saint]

No consultation? There has to be agreement by both parties. I would say that they are on shaky ground.

 

The whole of 'Next' had no consultation - they were informed that it was going to happen. Not sure there was time to consultant with thousands of workers given the timescales involved, logistically it would have been impossible with non-essential travel bans. Wouldn't expect a claim to hold up in a tribunal, but the law has never been straight forward!

[buctootim]

Some people here seem to be under a misapprehension. The current isolation measures are simply to slow down the rate -they aren't intended to and wont eliminate it. Unless there is an improbable stroke of luck then most people will likely catch it in time, if not this year then next. Even if a vaccine is developed it probably wont be given universally.

[egg]

Some people here seem to be under a misapprehension. The current isolation measures are simply to slow down the rate -they aren't intended to and wont eliminate it. Unless there is an improbable stroke of luck then most people will likely catch it in time, if not this year then next. Even if a vaccine is developed it probably wont be given universally.

I've not seen anyone think isolation will end it. It's going nowhere, but responsible people do their bit to help slow the spread.

[SO16_Saint]

I've not seen anyone think isolation will end it. It's going nowhere, but responsible people do their bit to help slow the spread.

 

I guess total isolation would eliminate it completely. If it has nowhere to transfer to it would die?

[Whitey Grandad]

The whole of 'Next' had no consultation - they were informed that it was going to happen. Not sure there was time to consultant with thousands of workers given the timescales involved, logistically it would have been impossible with non-essential travel bans. Wouldn't expect a claim to hold up in a tribunal, but the law has never been straight forward!

Guidance for employers:

 

“Agreeing to furlough employees

Employers should discuss with their staff and make any changes to the employment contract by agreement. When employers are making decisions in relation to the process, including deciding who to offer furlough to, equality and discrimination laws will apply in the usual way.

 

To be eligible for the grant employers must confirm in writing to their employee confirming that they have been furloughed. A record of this communication must be kept for five years.“

 

Guidance for employees:

 

“If you do not want to go on furlough

If your employer asks you to go on furlough and you refuse you may be at risk of redundancy or termination of employment, depending on the circumstances of your employer. However, this must be in line with normal redundancy rules and protections.”

[Whitey Grandad]

I guess total isolation would eliminate it completely. If it has nowhere to transfer to it would die?

 

In theory, yes, but we would still need the essential workers, NHS, Fire, Ambulance, power stations...

 

They you’d have to get the rest of the world to go along with you.

[egg]

Jesus wept!

 

Please let me know where you are getting that information from about 'covid deaths'. The BBC are reporting "a record 938 daily deaths were reported in UK hospitals." : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52221724 But they are very careful to not state that these were caused explicitly by covid, as far as I can tell, that is just your assumption.

 

It's been discussed before that as a 'reportable' disease, any death that occurs whilst 'infected' has to be reported to the WHO, which means, essentially you could bleed to death whilst infected and it will be reported, but the cause of death will be lack of blood!

 

I'm more than happy to be proven wrong - and have stated this more than once on this thread - and will be more than happy to look at any publication that is giving figures for deaths above and beyond the natural death rate, however, from everything I've read, this is not being reported. Enlighten me, show me the full facts and figures, pal.

Mate, I'm not willing to waste my time debating with you. You're clearly an idiot.

[aintforever]

Vulnerable people who should be isolating, because they're, you know, vulnerable.

 

Unless you're unsure of what the word 'isolating' means?

 

You are either a bit dumb or just being deliberately obtuse.

 

1. Some people will be vulnerable to this disease and not know it.

2. Some people will be isolating but will have no choice but to go out for supplies.

3. There will be many people who are not high risk but care for or are in contact with vulnerable people.

 

I had to go and get some shopping for my 75 year old mother yesterday and most people in Tescos were sensibly following the social distancing rules yet there were enough selfish, ignorant assholes like you ignoring it to make the whole exercise pointless. I’m extra careful around her but if I get it then there’s always a risk of transfer if I have to go in and help her with something.

[Lord Duckhunter]

failed to join in a mass EU purchase of ventilators.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tamesaint]

Thank God that this government is so inefficient that its "communication confusion" meant that we didnt join the ventilator scheme.

 

Why did Gove claim that it was an admin error?

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/news/uk/michael-gove-admits-communication-confusion-over-eu-ventilator-scheme-mix-up/&ved=2ahUKEwjdvqSZ-NnoAhW7ThUIHZYDAkwQFjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw1z5yVVzHbT--aAp1xG3hBC

[Johnny Bognor]

....., show me the full facts and figures, pal.

 

Is this the first case of poster-to-poster transmission of the use of the word "pal" to make a point?

 

I believe patient zero was Shurlock, with his constant use of the word to make a point.

 

Now that this infection is spreading, I urge all forum users to self isolate and stay off this thread.

 

Stay off this Thread | Protect Forum Users | Save SaintsWeb

[buctootim]

Is this the first case of poster-to-poster transmission of the use of the word "pal" to make a point?

 

I believe patient zero was Shurlock, with his constant use of the word to make a point.

 

Now that this infection is spreading, I urge all forum users to self isolate and stay off this thread.

 

Stay off this Thread | Protect Forum Users | Save SaintsWeb

 

I've been surprised how comparatively little lockdown activity there has been on Saintsweb. Would have thought with so many people bored at home posting would have risen but reverse seems the case if anything.

[Johnny Bognor]

I've been surprised how comparatively little lockdown activity there has been on Saintsweb. Would have thought with so many people bored at home posting would have risen but reverse seems the case if anything.

 

Agree I thought the same. I've been on here a little more than I normally am, which isnt much nowadays

[hypochondriac]

I've been surprised how comparatively little lockdown activity there has been on Saintsweb. Would have thought with so many people bored at home posting would have risen but reverse seems the case if anything.

Not a lot to talk about.

[Saint Billy]

Not a lot to talk about.

 

Too much DIY to do as commanded by her who has to be obeyed.

[Lighthouse]

I’ve been dethatching my lawn with a rake but I do pop in and out for a cuppa and to say hi to you lot.

[The Cat]

I'm still at work although on annual leave for a bit. Just knocked our old shed down which was fun.