It's one rule for one...

[wilts rover]

Just to remind people, the current coronavirus rules are that meeting of no-more than 30 people are allowed indoors, with all atendees to adhere to social distancing rules of 2m apart or 1.5m plus.

Boris Johnson accused of hypocrachy after addressing a 'packed' meeting of the 1922 with at least 50 MP's in attendence, all sitting 'cheek by jowl'

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-03/johnson-accused-of-hypocrisy-over-speech-to-packed-tory-meeting?srnd=premium-europe

[bpoolrover]

Would it not depend if it was work related? If it’s not it’s not the cleverest thing to do

[Janso]

Do the rules have a caveat for work-related meetings?

[bpoolrover]

Well many places of work have more than 50 people working there so depends I suppose

[bpoolrover]

And it says only meet up with a gathering under 30 people unless planned in compliance by a organisation  with Covid 19 secure guidance again I don’t no if that applies to this

[Janso]

If they're all crammed into a room then it's doubtful that they were adhering to the guidance, let's not kid ourselves.

[bpoolrover]

I have no idea if they were crammed into one room as they say they were all social distances of course does not mean they were

[Janso]

...you have no idea if they were crammed into one room? I mean, the room was only supposed to hold 30 at the moment, so if there were 50+ then it's a safe bet that they weren't really taking precautions.

How can you not know, did you even read the story that the thread is about? it says exactly this on the very top line before you even get past the photo.

[bpoolrover]

Could you show me a link of the picture of them all crammed in please as no I have not seen it

[Janso]

Nah, gonna take your stance and ask you to disprove me.

[drfchound]

Wilts, please retitle this thread as the janso and bpool chat room please.

[Janso]

Could you show me a link of the picture of them all crammed in please as no I have not seen it

Just ask yourself. Does it not say anything to you that No. 10 won't even DENY it?

[bpoolrover]

Thought so lol have a good evening

[bpoolrover]

I’ve not even disagreed with what happened I have said if they have there stupid

[Janso]

Thought so lol have a good evening

So you've got to have photographic proof of something that's widely accepted to have happened? Christ, that's a whole lot of history before the invention of the camera we'll have to ignore then if that's the way.

[bpoolrover]

Not going argue with you I said something and have to prove it with links, you can obviously do differently, and Graham Brady has said they were all social distancing so that must make it true lol

[Janso]

Not going argue with you I said something and have to prove it with links, you can obviously do differently, and Graham Brady has said they were all social distancing so that must make it true lol

So requiring photographic evidence is the same as asking for a bit of supporting proof from a couple of sources, gotcha. We'll just ignore that newspapers from all across the spectrum are reporting that this has happened because I wasn't in the room to take a picture on my phone.

Obviously Graham Brady is going to say they were all social distancing, he's the one in charge of the bloody committee. 🙄

[bpoolrover]

Lol so because it says in newspaper with no names provided that it happened it must be true? Good job your not a judge

[Janso]

You're a strange fella.

I'll leave it at that.

[bpoolrover]

Goodnight have a good weekend

[Bentley Bullet]

And here's me thinking you have to prove guilt, not innocence. Ah well, this forum doesn't get any better.

 bpoolrover, I honestly don't know why you bother. Ignore them and they'll go away eventually!

[SydneyRover]

yeah well if you think it's a hoot being run by a bunch of tw@ts that make rules for others and give the finger to anyone the has the temerity to question what they do enjoy. 

[wilts rover]

Wilts, please retitle this thread as the janso and bpool chat room please.

Well as a couple of posters have confirmed they are quite happy for it to be one rule for one and one rule for another I think I will leave it.

[Bentley Bullet]

yeah well if you think it's a hoot being run by a bunch of tw@ts that make rules for others and give the finger to anyone the has the temerity to question what they do enjoy. 

Exactly! I think this forum is anything but a hoot! That's why I don't bother responding on here anymore and suggested that bpoolrover did the same.

[SydneyRover]

Very strange from someone always handing out advice over who can and can't speak to whatever subject.

[Filo]

You're a strange fella.

I'll leave it at that.

Theres more than one that will argue when facts are staring them in the face mate

[drfchound]

You're a strange fella.

I'll leave it at that.

Theres more than one that will argue when facts are staring them in the face mate

Aye and there are plenty who say that things are facts when they clearly are not.

[Filo]

You're a strange fella.

I'll leave it at that.

Theres more than one that will argue when facts are staring them in the face mate

Aye and there are plenty who say that things are facts when they clearly are not.

I just knew who would take the bait 😂😂😂😂😂

[drfchound]

You're a strange fella.

I'll leave it at that.

Theres more than one that will argue when facts are staring them in the face mate

Aye and there are plenty who say that things are facts when they clearly are not.

I just knew who would take the bait 😂😂😂😂😂

Now some might call you a WUM for that comment.
I won’t though because generally you are a fair poster, just this time it was too obvious that you meant me after our chats yesterday.

[Not Now Kato]

yeah well if you think it's a hoot being run by a bunch of tw@ts that make rules for others and give the finger to anyone the has the temerity to question what they do enjoy. 

Exactly! I think this forum is anything but a hoot! That's why I don't bother responding on here anymore and suggested that bpoolrover did the same.

Erm, you just have!