Is "It's just a prank!" justification enough for implying having ebola in an airplane? Overreaction vs Tact debate going on in /r/videos. (np.reddit.com)
SubredditDrama
42 ups - 0 downs = 42 votes
59 comments submitted at 22:23:24 on Oct 9, 2014 by ItsSugar
>I can almost hear the braying and neighing of barnyard animals in that video. Fucking panicky herdbeasts, the lot of them.
fuckin sheeple worrying about contracting a deadly disease. if they had read the wiki article on ebola like i did yesterday, they'd know there was nothing to be afraid of
Just kind of knowing the slight symptoms of something before freaking out about it is kind of common sense.
Especially when we live in an age where people can have access to the world's information at the drop of a hat and you can google the symptoms really quickly. And especially if you're doing something like getting on a plane to travel.
Hell, my bosses and my wife's university both sent out emails listing a few signs of Ebola. It's all over the news. And if you're traveling in fear of a deadly illness, you should know the symptoms of said illness.
I know right! I wish people would act more like le logical me (a true gentlesir) when confronted with a deadly, highly infectious disease. I would have rushed up to him to feel his forehead straight away!
Or just Google the symptoms before calling in a team of people in hazmat suits you condescending prick.
It's Friday. Cheer up, bub.
"Don't worry everyone, I just Wiki'd Ebola on my phone. I'm pretty positive this guy doesn't have it. Don't worry airport authorities, local governments, and CDC. /u/Karenx1914 is on the case."
Or we could just not assume people have it unless they're showing actual symptoms?
Trying to disprove every single person or even implying the guy needs to be proven to not have Ebola in the first place is a ridiculous idea.
The assumption is they don't have Ebola unless they're showing symptoms and all this guy did is sneeze. That isn't a symptom, so there's no reason to support the fear mongering masses who want to shut down everything because of this.
But I suppose you wouldn't be able to make shitty condescending posts that way
> Or we could just not assume people have it unless they're showing actual symptoms?
I would guess that's why they called the authorities? Because the airline company isn't going to fuck around, especially after someone literally did what the guy was claiming?
While we aren't blocking travel from places where there's been an outbreak, we are still screening people. If someone frames themselves as sick, having come from Africa, and seemingly attempting to get around the screening process, you can't really blame the airline for wanting to make sure.
>I suppose you wouldn't be able to make shitty condescending posts that way
/u/karenx1914:
>If you keep practicing those mental gymanistics, you may just make the Olympics some day.
>OK then.
>What a fucking retard. I can't stand wearing condoms either because of girth issues, and while I would love to lower it a bit or redirect some of that size towards the length, but it's not possible.
I don't think you have any room trying to call people out on shitty comments.
> I would guess that's why they called the authorities? Because the airline company isn't going to fuck around, especially after someone literally did what the guy was claiming?
They called the authorities because they actually thought sneezing was a symptom of Ebola. That isn't "not fucking around", that's "willingly choosing to be completely ignorant on an issue and then calling in a team of people in hazmat suits".
Now I won't pretend to know whose fault this mainly is. Maybe the people who called the pros told them exactly what happened and didn't over-exaggerate the issue at all and it was the team that responded poorly.
And although it comes close to victim blaming, there's no doubt that the man shares a small portion of the responsibility for not being aware as to how stupid people can be.
But that response was someone's fuckup somewhere along the line. It isn't a reasonable response at all.
> I don't think you have any room trying to call people out on shitty comments.
If calling out shitty comments or giving a relevant comment on the issue is considered shitty, then this subreddit is a septic tank. Those comments are actual comments/responses, where as yours was basically an imaginary quote meant to be condescending because you couldn't be added to give an actual comment but didn't want to miss out on the precious karma.
" OK then" was a pretty shitty comment, but considering it was in response to a person who was trying to justify strip searching Muslims for being muslim, I think it was an appropriate response.
Feel free to keep trolling through my comment history though. I'm sure you'll eventually find something to go against. I won't do that to you, and instead will limit myself to the shit comment I responded to right in this very thread.
>They called the authorities because they actually thought sneezing was a symptom of Ebola.
I would say it was more because a person that was acting sick also said that he had just come from Africa. Just like a certain someone who also had just come from Africa carrying a certain virus.
>"willingly choosing to be completely ignorant on an issue and then calling in a team of people in hazmat suits".
It's not the airline's job to be informed. They are required to screen people coming into the country from hot zones. This man appeared to have tried to circumvent the screening. This throws up red flags for the CDC, and they will respond appropriately even if the laymen on the scene don't describe classic symptoms of Ebola.
This brings up another point. The CDC is willing to rely on layman reports of possible Ebola outbreaks, but they aren't going to accept a layman saying that a person isn't exhibiting the symptoms, especially with the evidence already given. They will want to check it out for themselves.
>it was the team that responded poorly.
You don't see the hilarity in you, a layman with no professional epidemiological experience, criticizing the CDC for the actions they took during this?
You act like everyone should have just whipped out their phones and found that sneezing wasn't ranked on the list of Ebola symptoms and gone "whew" and wiped their brow, with no acknowledgement about how we know humans work. If someone yells fire in a theater but no one can see the symptoms of a fire, does that mean we shouldn't head for the exits?
I was actually just looking at your comment history to find the ones you posted in this thread. That one just jumped out at me as hilarious for someone that posts to /r/bigdickproblems in earnest calling other people condescending.
>That one just jumped out at me as hilarious for someone that posts to /r/bigdickproblems in earnest calling other people condescending.
I've never posted there before. And how are the things there related to anyone being a condescending at all?
As for the rest of your post, it still seems to be under the assumption that we test everyone for Ebola and that I'm advocating we do it via google, neither of which is true. I'm just saying that you probably shouldn't call in teams of people for something that isn't an issue, and that everyone would know it isn't an issue if they bothered to learn anything about the thing their terrified of before calling in a team of people to shuffle the guy away and deal with it.
In your fire example, it would be more like someone seeing someone spill a drink and then standing up, pointing at the spill, and screaming "FIRE!!"
Then everyone in the theater agreeing that it was a fire and calling in the fire department, who proceed to spray the spill with a fire extinguisher just in case it was actually a fire or perhaps just to ease the fears of the large numbers of people who have grown terrified of fire in the past few months because of all the news reports on it.
More Comments - Click Here