EatATaco

The poster made the claim:

it became understood that merely because someone can get a photo of you they have the legal right to do so.

And now you're talking about the government spying. Total non sequitur that has nothing to do with what I was discussing.

The article is about them leaving class to go make tiktoks in the bathroom, and in the article the admin claims that it has lead to "Not as many visits to the bathroom, not staying as long" so it's working, apparently. Nothing do with attempting to stop them outright from making videos.

it became understood that merely because someone can get a photo of you they have the legal right to do so.

What jurisdiction is this true? There are certainly times that there is an expectation of privacy and getting a photo of you would be illegal. Easy example: and owner of a store can't photo you in the dressing room, the even tho they could put a camera in there. It's the same thing here, there is an expectation of privacy in your home (or for many enclosed and private spaces), so this kind of "picture" would likely already be a violation.

I think I probably agree with you about the efficacy of the vaccine, but this is a terrible reply to someone who actually provided you some kind of argument.

I started to read that article but it was a lot of charged language, and then when it got to the point about transmission it made the typical argument that they weren't tested to see if they stopped transmission (the primary goal of the vaccination was to decrease hospitalization and death, so they didn't test for this). I then realized how long the article was and lost interest. Can you quote the part of the article where they actually make the claim that it did not lower transmission?

Here's a link to an actual study that claims it reduced transmission.

https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o298#:~:text=A%20study2%20of%20covid,transmission%20by%2040%2D50%25.

I would need to know more because what if they were currently all out of the office and they were mandating everyone, including themselves, go back in? It was the same thing when my company announced it, we were all at home and the head of my division, also at home, had a meeting where he, from home, told us all that we would be returning to the office.

Now he's back in the office 5 days a week and we're all 3 days.

Bro, it's literally worse than if Hitler and Stalin and Trump had some weird three-way baby.

But this is my point. . .when I'm in the office they'll just turn around and ask me, on average, close to 3 questions a day. If it averages below 3 questions per week when one or both of us is WFH, I wouldn't be surprised.

I'm not saying that there is no way to make it happen, but that it simply doesn't happen. (Although I will say the ad hoc jump-in is something that can't happen over video chat. . .unless everyone is always in the room, which is even worse than working in an office lol) I can't explain why, but the barrier to initiating a conversation is much higher when it's not just "turn around and ask" and instead "send a message."

Pretty clearly I didn't miss anything because the other poster jumped in to defend what they said. But I suspect like the other poster you won't want to admit how wrong you are.

I was 100% WFH for about a decade before the pandemic. I'm perfectly fine with both teams and zoom. When I finally got my previous company on board for webex (the company was split in 2 small locations, and then me WFH), and then eventually a move to teams, it was great. I like in person meetings better, for sure, but I've long been very comfortable using video meetings.

And while I agree there is nothing actually stopping people from jumping on zoom, my experience is that there is a lot more psychological friction because it doesn't happen nearly as much as it does when we are in the same physical space. And this doesn't even touch on all the times I'm talking to someone else about something, and another person overhears me and either has a similar question or something to add. And it almost reads as if you are saying I should schedule meetings with these people to meet a couple of times a day, but that would be even more painful.

I can't make any sense of this. If your argument is that it sometimes happens, I would be surprised if it were untrue. But your claim implied that it's common, rather than just your personal experience.

I explicitly pointed that out. I also gave a good reason why. But my experience in talking about this also extends beyond just people I work with.

But I would also like to point out that at least 80% of our team stayed on after hybrid was announced.