Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Virus |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"At a cost of £5.8m Boris is writing to 30million homes. I find this confusing.... is this not 30million potential interactions that are unnecessary? 30 million opportunities to increase the spread of the virus? I’ve read and heard of many conspiracy theories and struggle to believe any, but this latest action I find counterintuitive! " Agreed. Writing a letter to every single household is a waste of resources that could and should be used elsewhere. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Royal Mail are delivering letters anyway Its also believed that the virus can't survive on surfaces like paper and cardboard " But they don’t need to deliver these letters, they don’t need to be printed. While the virus may not survive as long on paper or card than other surfaces the time taken from delivery on one side of the door to receipt on the other side would be seconds.... and to what end? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Royal Mail are delivering letters anyway Its also believed that the virus can't survive on surfaces like paper and cardboard But they don’t need to deliver these letters, they don’t need to be printed. While the virus may not survive as long on paper or card than other surfaces the time taken from delivery on one side of the door to receipt on the other side would be seconds.... and to what end? " I agree that it's a bit superfluous, when 99% of the population have internet and TV However it's no different than Royal mail posting any other letter. I guess you could argue that they should halt the postal service all together | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The thing is that the message is not getting through by other means. I’m not a fan of Boris and his cronies at all but I think they are trying what they can. What I object to is the wording of the letter. I would think I’m reasonably well educated (no degree but English to Higher (a level) but the letter is too wordy. It sounds too much like Boris. People need it in plain English, with the key points on the back in the 5 other languages used in things like voting booths. A leaflet rather than a letter, without it being connected with a government of any particular party would have been a much better idea. And whilst on party politics, has anyone else noticed the colours on the lectern whenever there are announcements, of red blue and yellow? Coalition government / government of national unity on the cards?" Yep I noticed that too | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Royal Mail are delivering letters anyway Its also believed that the virus can't survive on surfaces like paper and cardboard But they don’t need to deliver these letters, they don’t need to be printed. While the virus may not survive as long on paper or card than other surfaces the time taken from delivery on one side of the door to receipt on the other side would be seconds.... and to what end? I agree that it's a bit superfluous, when 99% of the population have internet and TV However it's no different than Royal mail posting any other letter. I guess you could argue that they should halt the postal service all together " I could argue that but won’t, with the other millions of posted items, I can’t decide whether some, most, or any, are necessary. What I do know is 6m cost is unnecessary, 30m letters are unnecessary. Current methods of digital communication are there and carry no risk! Who benefits? By the time the leaflet is printed the information it contains could well be out of date. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The thing is that the message is not getting through by other means. I’m not a fan of Boris and his cronies at all but I think they are trying what they can. What I object to is the wording of the letter. I would think I’m reasonably well educated (no degree but English to Higher (a level) but the letter is too wordy. It sounds too much like Boris. People need it in plain English, with the key points on the back in the 5 other languages used in things like voting booths. A leaflet rather than a letter, without it being connected with a government of any particular party would have been a much better idea. And whilst on party politics, has anyone else noticed the colours on the lectern whenever there are announcements, of red blue and yellow? Coalition government / government of national unity on the cards?" A letter coming through the post will have everyone complying? It’s nonsense! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remember too, that by virtue of us being on here, we are digitally literate. There are lots of people in the UK who still do not have access to the internet. Also...If all else fails, the letter can be put to one side for when the toilet paper runs out " Considered that! The guys on tv telling us what to do? The guy from shelter wanting a tenner... and if none of this media is reaching you then I dare say family are feeding information .... if you aren’t aware of what’s going on you’re probably so isolated as to not be at risk anyway! And I’d considered that too... it’ll be too shiny to be effective and if flushed would clog up the sewers! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"At a cost of £5.8m Boris is writing to 30million homes. I find this confusing.... is this not 30million potential interactions that are unnecessary? 30 million opportunities to increase the spread of the virus? I’ve read and heard of many conspiracy theories and struggle to believe any, but this latest action I find counterintuitive! " The way I see it: Cost - 5.8 million is nothing, a drop in the ocean when compared with the support packages being offered running into hundreds of billions. This won’t affect the ability to buy as many ventilators, ppe etc as is required. Delivery - Royal Mail still delivering post and virus doesn’t survive on paper so no new or additional risk in delivering an important letter. Reason - Government has to prepare us , formally advise every household, state the gravity of the situation before the next stage. Even in these visual and digital time’s It’s not enough to hope that people watch the tv, read the internet. It has to be good old pen and paper. I really don’t understand the constant picking away at every action the government are taking and then suggesting that the exact opposite is what they actually should be doing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"At a cost of £5.8m Boris is writing to 30million homes. I find this confusing.... is this not 30million potential interactions that are unnecessary? 30 million opportunities to increase the spread of the virus? I’ve read and heard of many conspiracy theories and struggle to believe any, but this latest action I find counterintuitive! The way I see it: Cost - 5.8 million is nothing, a drop in the ocean when compared with the support packages being offered running into hundreds of billions. This won’t affect the ability to buy as many ventilators, ppe etc as is required. Delivery - Royal Mail still delivering post and virus doesn’t survive on paper so no new or additional risk in delivering an important letter. Reason - Government has to prepare us , formally advise every household, state the gravity of the situation before the next stage. Even in these visual and digital time’s It’s not enough to hope that people watch the tv, read the internet. It has to be good old pen and paper. I really don’t understand the constant picking away at every action the government are taking and then suggesting that the exact opposite is what they actually should be doing. " I disagree with how you see it. No matter how small you believe the cost to be it’s cost without benefit. Delivery via Royal Mail increases frequency of risk with no benefit. Reason in extraordinary times, extraordinary measures... why does pen and paper work/is more valid than all the communications, I believe there are laws being enforced for which there was no written notice provided. When the next communique needs to be delivered does it too have to be delivered via similar means. It is enough! I haven’t constantly picked at the government, I’ve stayed safe, isolated, washed my hands, not panic bought.... I maintain ... sending a letter to 30million homes at a cost of £5.8m is counter intuitive! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Delivery via Royal Mail increases frequency of risk with no benefit. " What Royal Mail call “door to doors” are still being delivered. Unless you opt out, they get delivered to every household, so they’re still out delivering them until those particular contracts lapse. Why do you think those companies above spend all that money when the majority put them straight into the recycling. The take up rate on junk mail is 1%, so as much as it may not benefit you, 1% of 30 million- and that is people parting with money for an item or service, is still a lot of penetration. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Delivery via Royal Mail increases frequency of risk with no benefit. What Royal Mail call “door to doors” are still being delivered. Unless you opt out, they get delivered to every household, so they’re still out delivering them until those particular contracts lapse. Why do you think those companies above spend all that money when the majority put them straight into the recycling. The take up rate on junk mail is 1%, so as much as it may not benefit you, 1% of 30 million- and that is people parting with money for an item or service, is still a lot of penetration. " Sorry I may have missed your point .... the take up rate at 1%, by that rationale the take up of the information delivered will be 1%, possibly effective for a business because TV advertising, internet, texts direct to phones and emails are less accessible or more expensive, of the 300,000 ‘uptake’ it’s only effective if those 300000 are people were not being bombarded with the same information elsewhere. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"At a cost of £5.8m Boris is writing to 30million homes. I find this confusing.... is this not 30million potential interactions that are unnecessary? 30 million opportunities to increase the spread of the virus? I’ve read and heard of many conspiracy theories and struggle to believe any, but this latest action I find counterintuitive! The way I see it: Cost - 5.8 million is nothing, a drop in the ocean when compared with the support packages being offered running into hundreds of billions. This won’t affect the ability to buy as many ventilators, ppe etc as is required. Delivery - Royal Mail still delivering post and virus doesn’t survive on paper so no new or additional risk in delivering an important letter. Reason - Government has to prepare us , formally advise every household, state the gravity of the situation before the next stage. Even in these visual and digital time’s It’s not enough to hope that people watch the tv, read the internet. It has to be good old pen and paper. I really don’t understand the constant picking away at every action the government are taking and then suggesting that the exact opposite is what they actually should be doing. I disagree with how you see it. " That’s ok. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The thing is that the message is not getting through by other means. I’m not a fan of Boris and his cronies at all but I think they are trying what they can. What I object to is the wording of the letter. I would think I’m reasonably well educated (no degree but English to Higher (a level) but the letter is too wordy. It sounds too much like Boris. People need it in plain English, with the key points on the back in the 5 other languages used in things like voting booths. A leaflet rather than a letter, without it being connected with a government of any particular party would have been a much better idea. And whilst on party politics, has anyone else noticed the colours on the lectern whenever there are announcements, of red blue and yellow? Coalition government / government of national unity on the cards? A letter coming through the post will have everyone complying? It’s nonsense! " This.. Some will never comply no matter how its delivered.. It's a waste of money or is it so they can later say 'we'll we tried to tell you in the media and some didn't listen and we also posted the advice and still some didn't listen so now we have to do x, y or z'.. Fuck sugar coating it, do what's necessary now to get on top of this thing.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Delivery via Royal Mail increases frequency of risk with no benefit. What Royal Mail call “door to doors” are still being delivered. Unless you opt out, they get delivered to every household, so they’re still out delivering them until those particular contracts lapse. Why do you think those companies above spend all that money when the majority put them straight into the recycling. The take up rate on junk mail is 1%, so as much as it may not benefit you, 1% of 30 million- and that is people parting with money for an item or service, is still a lot of penetration. Sorry I may have missed your point .... the take up rate at 1%, by that rationale the take up of the information delivered will be 1%, possibly effective for a business because TV advertising, internet, texts direct to phones and emails are less accessible or more expensive, of the 300,000 ‘uptake’ it’s only effective if those 300000 are people were not being bombarded with the same information elsewhere. " Ok I’ll try a different tack. During elections, a candidate is allowed one piece of free (it’s not, taxpayers pay for it) election communication. Yet well off candidates and all political parties still spend money sending extra stuff. This in spite of people being bombarded with TV coverage. So it does work. Here’s another try. It’s been shown that a complaint “letter” is more effective than one sent by email. The reasons this may be, are varied but it IS more effective. Maybe it will make no difference to you and you have every right to resent its cost but direct mail does work. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Delivery via Royal Mail increases frequency of risk with no benefit. What Royal Mail call “door to doors” are still being delivered. Unless you opt out, they get delivered to every household, so they’re still out delivering them until those particular contracts lapse. Why do you think those companies above spend all that money when the majority put them straight into the recycling. The take up rate on junk mail is 1%, so as much as it may not benefit you, 1% of 30 million- and that is people parting with money for an item or service, is still a lot of penetration. Sorry I may have missed your point .... the take up rate at 1%, by that rationale the take up of the information delivered will be 1%, possibly effective for a business because TV advertising, internet, texts direct to phones and emails are less accessible or more expensive, of the 300,000 ‘uptake’ it’s only effective if those 300000 are people were not being bombarded with the same information elsewhere. Ok I’ll try a different tack. During elections, a candidate is allowed one piece of free (it’s not, taxpayers pay for it) election communication. Yet well off candidates and all political parties still spend money sending extra stuff. This in spite of people being bombarded with TV coverage. So it does work. Here’s another try. It’s been shown that a complaint “letter” is more effective than one sent by email. The reasons this may be, are varied but it IS more effective. Maybe it will make no difference to you and you have every right to resent its cost but direct mail does work. " I don’t think you can compare direct mail sent during elections or for promotional activities to this! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Delivery via Royal Mail increases frequency of risk with no benefit. What Royal Mail call “door to doors” are still being delivered. Unless you opt out, they get delivered to every household, so they’re still out delivering them until those particular contracts lapse. Why do you think those companies above spend all that money when the majority put them straight into the recycling. The take up rate on junk mail is 1%, so as much as it may not benefit you, 1% of 30 million- and that is people parting with money for an item or service, is still a lot of penetration. Sorry I may have missed your point .... the take up rate at 1%, by that rationale the take up of the information delivered will be 1%, possibly effective for a business because TV advertising, internet, texts direct to phones and emails are less accessible or more expensive, of the 300,000 ‘uptake’ it’s only effective if those 300000 are people were not being bombarded with the same information elsewhere. Ok I’ll try a different tack. During elections, a candidate is allowed one piece of free (it’s not, taxpayers pay for it) election communication. Yet well off candidates and all political parties still spend money sending extra stuff. This in spite of people being bombarded with TV coverage. So it does work. Here’s another try. It’s been shown that a complaint “letter” is more effective than one sent by email. The reasons this may be, are varied but it IS more effective. Maybe it will make no difference to you and you have every right to resent its cost but direct mail does work. I don’t think you can compare direct mail sent during elections or for promotional activities to this! " Nothing can be compared to this. So by that rationale there is as much proof to show that a direct mailing will work as wont. But if other means have not seemed to work, then surely something is better than nothing? And yes 6 million is a lot of money but prevention is better, and cheaper, than cure. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Delivery via Royal Mail increases frequency of risk with no benefit. What Royal Mail call “door to doors” are still being delivered. Unless you opt out, they get delivered to every household, so they’re still out delivering them until those particular contracts lapse. Why do you think those companies above spend all that money when the majority put them straight into the recycling. The take up rate on junk mail is 1%, so as much as it may not benefit you, 1% of 30 million- and that is people parting with money for an item or service, is still a lot of penetration. Sorry I may have missed your point .... the take up rate at 1%, by that rationale the take up of the information delivered will be 1%, possibly effective for a business because TV advertising, internet, texts direct to phones and emails are less accessible or more expensive, of the 300,000 ‘uptake’ it’s only effective if those 300000 are people were not being bombarded with the same information elsewhere. Ok I’ll try a different tack. During elections, a candidate is allowed one piece of free (it’s not, taxpayers pay for it) election communication. Yet well off candidates and all political parties still spend money sending extra stuff. This in spite of people being bombarded with TV coverage. So it does work. Here’s another try. It’s been shown that a complaint “letter” is more effective than one sent by email. The reasons this may be, are varied but it IS more effective. Maybe it will make no difference to you and you have every right to resent its cost but direct mail does work. I don’t think you can compare direct mail sent during elections or for promotional activities to this! Nothing can be compared to this. So by that rationale there is as much proof to show that a direct mailing will work as wont. But if other means have not seemed to work, then surely something is better than nothing? And yes 6 million is a lot of money but prevention is better, and cheaper, than cure. " Other means have worked.... they seem to be an effective means of communication .... those that won’t listen and heed the advice will not read or heed the advice.... those who have heard the messages have, largely, heeded the advice! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wonder what percentage will end up in paper recycling or other waste receptacle without having been read...??" Possibly, but that’s the choice of the recipient . Can’t complain about a lack of communication at a later point ... If nothing else keep it as a historical document - pass it on (the letter not the virus  ) to future generations of the family ...” I remember in 2020 when ...”
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"At a cost of £5.8m Boris is writing to 30million homes. I find this confusing.... is this not 30million potential interactions that are unnecessary? 30 million opportunities to increase the spread of the virus? I’ve read and heard of many conspiracy theories and struggle to believe any, but this latest action I find counterintuitive! " No it is a very good idea,as some elderly people may very well find this of benefit.Also we all get mail,parcels deliverd etc so post comes anyway and a letter is relatively unlikely to carry virus | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maybe if people listened to government advice then they wouldn't feel the need to send letters. Then they can say they have tried every means necessary to help people understand before issuing tougher control measures and penalties for non compliance It shouldn't be hard, must be so frustrating for them to try and contain 60million monkeys in the zoo he controls" True bur some will complain about anything because they do not like Boris.some people just want to find fault it des not help | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maybe if people listened to government advice then they wouldn't feel the need to send letters. Then they can say they have tried every means necessary to help people understand before issuing tougher control measures and penalties for non compliance It shouldn't be hard, must be so frustrating for them to try and contain 60million monkeys in the zoo he controlsTrue bur some will complain about anything because they do not like Boris.some people just want to find fault it des not help" Exactly that, it doesn't help at all  we just need to get through it as best we can I guess.
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"At a cost of £5.8m Boris is writing to 30million homes. I find this confusing.... is this not 30million potential interactions that are unnecessary? 30 million opportunities to increase the spread of the virus? I’ve read and heard of many conspiracy theories and struggle to believe any, but this latest action I find counterintuitive! The way I see it: Cost - 5.8 million is nothing, a drop in the ocean when compared with the support packages being offered running into hundreds of billions. This won’t affect the ability to buy as many ventilators, ppe etc as is required. Delivery - Royal Mail still delivering post and virus doesn’t survive on paper so no new or additional risk in delivering an important letter. Reason - Government has to prepare us , formally advise every household, state the gravity of the situation before the next stage. Even in these visual and digital time’s It’s not enough to hope that people watch the tv, read the internet. It has to be good old pen and paper. I really don’t understand the constant picking away at every action the government are taking and then suggesting that the exact opposite is what they actually should be doing. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"At a cost of £5.8m Boris is writing to 30million homes. I find this confusing.... is this not 30million potential interactions that are unnecessary? 30 million opportunities to increase the spread of the virus? I’ve read and heard of many conspiracy theories and struggle to believe any, but this latest action I find counterintuitive! No it is a very good idea,as some elderly people may very well find this of benefit.Also we all get mail,parcels deliverd etc so post comes anyway and a letter is relatively unlikely to carry virus" No it’s not! Relatively unlikely but when there are 30m increased instances of this relatively low risk activity .... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
