We got there about 3:40. In the building for the National Anthem. Good 15 minutes probably +.we got there around 330. in the building in 5 minutes
We got there about 3:40. In the building for the National Anthem. Good 15 minutes probably +.we got there around 330. in the building in 5 minutes
I was at the door at 3:35 and there were 3 people checking cards at the first group of doors. Plus more people checking at the second group of doors. Something must of happened because that wasn’t the case 20 mins earlier.I’m sure there were plenty of other people inside the RAC they could have pulled out to check cards.
I live over an hour away and have had no problem getting in on time when I get to the front of the RAC 10-15 minutes before the game.
They can’t have 1 person “checking” thousands of peoples cards - stop making excuses.
Yeah, that "Johns Hopkins Study" was laughable in its inaccuracies and data cherry-picking. Countries that smartly utilized NPIs (non-pharmaceutical interventions), like masking, testing/tracing/isolating and selective lockdowns, especially until their populations were mostly vaccinated have crushed COVID relative to the US and most of Europe, South America and many other countries. As per the Forbes article,
Claiming that NPIs “have had little to no public health effects” simply goes against what’s been observed and documented throughout this Covid-19 pandemic. Just look at the rather stark differences among how countries have fared during this pandemic in terms of Covid-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths. Countries that have followed the existing scientific evidence such as New Zealand, Taiwan, and South Korea have had much fewer deaths and hospitalizations than countries that have frequently veered away from the science such as the U.S., the U.K., and Brazil.
Specifically, countries like Japan, Australia, Norway, South Korea and many more had about 1/10th to 1/20th the per capita death rates vs. the US over the length of the pandemic and countries with the most aggressive interventions, like New Zealand, Taiwan, Hong Kong, China and others had less than 1/100th our per capita death rate. That doesn't mean there weren't economic or other impacts of some of the mitigation measures, but to argue that they were completely ineffective with regard to saving lives is ignorant.
It wasn't the checker it was the scanners.
I walked right past the checker he never saw anything of mine. The scanners are just slow and of course you get the occasional middle aged woman who can't figure out how show her tickets holding up the line (that happened when I got to the door at least)
AZBlues...don't waste any energy refuting Bac....he's the #1 conspiracy theory clownshow moron here. His ridiculousness is only rivaled by Baghdad Bob except Bob knew he was bullshi**ing.
Bac actually believes what he says. He's far-right in ideology, but far-left on the IQ curve. Idiots are real.
It's been known for a long time that fomite transmission is negligible, so stop with the faux outrage on that one.but I thought going away from paper tickets was the way to go they said, and to make matters worse...the guy TOUCHED MY PHONE AND EVERYONE ELSES...how is that for stopping the spread
The devices take forever for tickets and parking. Definitely not speeding things up. I seem to get in faster with my paper tickets than people do with their phones.but I thought going away from paper tickets was the way to go they said, and to make matters worse...the guy TOUCHED MY PHONE AND EVERYONE ELSES...how is that for stopping the spread
There was nothing "wrong" with that CDC study, per se, but it's far from the most powerful scientific study supporting that masks reduce infections (not stop, reduce), as it was survey-based and not a randomized, controlled trial (which have been done, showing mask efficacy). It also was conducted before the much more transmissible omicron evolved, so its current applicability is less relevant other than to once again show that N95/KN95 are the best masks, which has been known forever.you know what else was laughable...the cdc using that phony mask study they touted last week. NOT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT not to mention it was barely scientific in how it was done
but so it goes...you toss the ones you dont like and tout the ones that prop up what you have been doing and then act like only you know science
Yes, I can be. So ?You Shelby are a ****in'*******.
I don't know about years. We started the season without the checks so if the numbers keep trending the right way, hopefully it won't be in place next year.I emailed the athletic department after the game and was told they cannot find people willing to staff the lines to check documents, but that the vax card check will be a permanent fixture of game day at RU even after the state lifts restrictions and likened it to checking IDs at a bar.
So I guess we'll be doing this for years to come.
Oh no... You've got to be kidding me!... You mean that I paid that ticket guy big bucks to contaminate Bac's phone for nothing? And what's worse, the guy evidently tried to contaminate everybody else's phone too, when he received explicit instructions to only contaminate Bac's phone.It's been known for a long time that fomite transmission is negligible, so stop with the faux outrage on that one.
It’s a respiratory virus. Hence the masks. Just don’t make out with your phone and you should be alright.but I thought going away from paper tickets was the way to go they said, and to make matters worse...the guy TOUCHED MY PHONE AND EVERYONE ELSES...how is that for stopping the spread
Oh no... You've got to be kidding me!... You mean that I paid that ticket guy big bucks to contaminate Bac's phone for nothing? And what's worse, the guy evidently tried to contaminate everybody else's phone too, when he received explicit instructions to only contaminate Bac's phone.
Oh well... I just hope that Sweet Pea's dad will be okay if the guy touched his phone too. Wife has absolutely no interest in RU sports without Sweet Pea.
That’s the irony of it all. It hasn’t been. I suppose it saves paper but paper was easier and quicker.The devices take forever for tickets and parking. Definitely not speeding things up. I seem to get in faster with my paper tickets than people do with their phones.
Some of it could be “operator” error. Maybe it will take a few more seasons to operate better.That’s the irony of it all. It hasn’t been. I suppose it saves paper but paper was easier and quicker.
The ticket machine took longer than the guy checking cards.I’m sure there were plenty of other people inside the RAC they could have pulled out to check cards.
I live over an hour away and have had no problem getting in on time when I get to the front of the RAC 10-15 minutes before the game.
They can’t have 1 person “checking” thousands of peoples cards - stop making excuses.
The ticket machine took longer than the guy checking cards.
“Bac and his henchmen”…I'm not angry, I'm just chuckling to myself... Massive Johns Hopkins study???? Science? I guess we have a very different understanding of what science is.
Did you actually read all of the details of the actual economists' study and how they chose to obtain information? Only one of the 3 economists (NOT medical or science personnel) who authored the study had anything to do with Johns Hopkins, and he had nothing to do with the renowned medical school... I'm not sure if I'd call that "massive", at least not when using that study as your ironclad evidence that institutions "ignore the science"..... The main thing that those authors concluded was that lockdowns only reduce the covid mortality rate by a small amount, and that lockdowns significantly hurt the economy, based on the small amount of studies that they chose to use for their conclusions out of over 18,000 studies that they had available to them. So I'm not sure how thorough or accurate their results were. And before Bac and his henchmen start accusing me of obtaining my words from left wing media sources again, I only looked at the actual study that was published, and then researched the authors.
And this is a story regarding the "study" from Forbes that I just found after I typed this post, for you guys who are taking the "study" as gospel and using it as "proof" that you can ignore any covid precautions. FYI, Forbes is not a left wing media outlet.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucel...ineffective-against-covid-19/?sh=1a071d0a1225
Obviously I don't agree that masks are completely useless, but I also don't like the idea of a guy handling my phone after handling hundreds of strangers' phones either, even though the chance of transmitting or contracting the virus may be a little lower from touching a phone than from certain other forms of transmission. But since transmission of the virus is still possible from touching a contaminated phone (until the virus on the phone dies), I'd rather avoid having live virus near my face and mouth and on my hands if possible, and especially if I didn't have a way to sanitize my phone and hands at the time.yes a guy wearing gloves touching everyones germy phones, that makes tons of sense..almost as much as sense as the useless masks at this point
They’ll latch on to anything they can.I wasn't trying to defend or support all covid restrictions in my previous post Bac, and I don't want to start a debate that ends up getting another thread locked... What I was trying to do was to point out the details and facts surrounding the aforementioned "study", to show that it probably isn't the best evidence to use as proof that covid restrictions don't work.
From "Marty". Lol
Nobody has ever touched my phone at a game? You hold it up to show vax and you scan it at ticket machine.Obviously I don't agree that masks are completely useless, but I also don't like the idea of a guy handling my phone after handling hundreds of strangers' phones either, even though the chance of transmitting or contracting the virus may be a little lower from touching a phone than from certain other forms of transmission. But since transmission of the virus is still possible from touching a contaminated phone (until the virus on the phone dies), I'd rather avoid having live virus near my face and mouth and on my hands if possible, and especially if I didn't have a way to sanitize my phone and hands at the time.
Why did the guy in Bac's line touch everybody's phone then? Did the event staff also touch other poster's phones, or did Bac just pick a bad line to go in? Or is the ticket machine one thing, and the verification of vaccination or negative test another thing that might require handling of the phone by staff? (It's hard to get to a game at the JMAC from Arizona, so it's been a few years for me and I don't know how the entry process works...)Nobody has ever touched my phone at a game? You hold it up and you scan it at ticket machine.
You forgot to mention something obvious. Any study that tries to measure whether lockdowns worked or didn't, especially in the US, is BS. How do you account for the fact that a huge # of people ignored the mandate and did whatever the hell they wanted? There is no data on this, so any analysis is fatally compromised.The "Hopkins" study did not come out of the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center; it came out of a center started by an econ prof there who is a fellow at the Cato Institute. None of the authors have any background in epidemiology. They basically eliminated almost all studies that could show that lockdowns work. But, they included a study done by an economist here in NZ that purported to show that lockdowns don't work. In New Zealand!
They also eliminated any study that modeled death projections. That's pretty much the best way to estimate deaths avoided. Imagine you are mayor of a town and a railroad runs through it. 1000 people are holding a party on the tracks and you know that the 6:47 out of Newark is going to roll around a blind corner and through the town without stopping in 15 minutes. So you go to the tracks and tell the people about this and order them to get off the tracks. They do. Then the train rolls through. Nobody hurt, and they go back to partying. Did you save 1000 lives with your order? Or maybe at least 100? Well, you'd have to model the mortality rate. But if you did, the Hopkins/Cato economists wouldn't count your study because you used statistical modeling. According to them, there is no evidence that any lives were saved.
Why did the guy in Bac's line touch everybody's phone then? Did the event staff also touch other poster's phones, or did Bac just pick a bad line to go in? Or is the ticket machine one thing, and the verification of vaccination or negative test another thing that might require handling of the phone by staff? (It's hard to get to a game at the JMAC from Arizona, so it's been a few years for me and I don't know how the entry process works...)
I think it is safe to say that in theory with 100% compliance, lockdowns work. However, in real world practice, hell no. Freewill gets in the way. LOL!You only have to look in the comments to Murphy's tweets about lifting school mask mandates. These people risk assessments have been ****ed
What a bunch of idiots on this thread.
the line had nothing to do with vax cards…all about ticket entry as those machines that’s scan and having to use your phone are awful.
there were kids online laughing at some people who couldn’t figure out their phones. It was like watching monkeys use tools for the first time.
This board has been pretty good about sticking to hoops. Can we continue to do that without the interlopers addicted to politicizing everything screwing things up? Last thing we need is another one of these threads as we enter a critical run.You forgot to mention something obvious. Any study that tries to measure whether lockdowns worked or didn't, especially in the US, is BS. How do you account for the fact that a huge # of people ignored the mandate and did whatever the hell they wanted? There is no data on this, so any analysis is fatally compromised.
This board has been pretty good about sticking to hoops. Can we continue to do that without the interlopers addicted to politicizing everything screwing things up? Last thing we need is another one of these threads as we enter a critical run.
Or are they rushing to "shut down" faulty and inaccurate information that certain people post as fact, that could be harmful to others if people inadvertently believe that the inaccurate posted information is true?Look how they rush to shut down anything that challenges the company line
So predictable
As if they got everything right...the hubris in them..all lockstep
Or are they rushing to "shut down" faulty and inaccurate information that certain people post as fact, that could be harmful to others if people inadvertently believe that the inaccurate posted information is true?
The Knight Report
Rutgers Baseball Transfer Portal Profile: RHP Enger Paulino
The Knight Report
Join The Knight Report TODAY and get it for 60% off!
High School Football
Two New Jersey high school football teams banned from NJSIAA postseason for fighting
The Knight Report
The Knight Report - Ask The Experts Chat: October 14th Edition
The Knight Report
Rutgers vs. Maryland Preview: Early Thoughts on the Terps - TKR Pod