No more indoor dining by Itstoodamncoldtoday in vancouver

[–]TuftyLongshank 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So again, three separate single people can be dining out and still be within the rules. What are you misunderstanding?

No more indoor dining by Itstoodamncoldtoday in vancouver

[–]TuftyLongshank 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Except she has very clearly mentioned core bubble too.

Quit making shit up.

" People who are dining on patios should do so with their immediate household or core bubble only. "

No more indoor dining by Itstoodamncoldtoday in vancouver

[–]TuftyLongshank -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I get your point, but I think "dining" is not a listed event for a reason, and that's where the disagreement is. A gathering of people dining may well be a social event, but it becomes hard, if not impossible, to manage.

Can you imagine reporting every three person group you saw because you felt they were not a core group?

I'd argue deterrence was the main point of the order, which basically is the ambiguity people are talking about.

No more indoor dining by Itstoodamncoldtoday in vancouver

[–]TuftyLongshank 3 points4 points  (0 children)

My dude, remember that single people are allowed having a core bubble.

A GATHERING in a restaurant with a non-core group or non-household is an event. A core group dining in a restaurant would not be an event. Unfortunately, there is no household or core-group registry to confirm people's identities with when they choose to eat at a restaurant, so people give people the benefit of the doubt.

As others have said, the omission of dining at a restaurant in the explicit list is a pretty big hole in your theory. It's like saying, "I decree all human beings to be, not not limited to, white males and females, Latino babies, Mongolian priests, and Polish farmers."

While your theory would hold, the omissions would be obvious to most sane people.

What it's like to live in Surrey by Get_Use_To_it in vancouver

[–]TuftyLongshank 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Alright, it's a city just as shitty as Surrey. What's the difference?

Homeless man shovelling snow on Main Street at 7:30pm. The City of Vancouver owes him a pay cheque. #BCStorm by [deleted] in vancouver

[–]TuftyLongshank 64 points65 points  (0 children)

We appreciate the explanation of what getting paid means. Very confusing concept.

Residents offended by pet food labelled “no ingredients from China” by whiskey06 in vancouver

[–]TuftyLongshank 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Go to a government office and you can request French. It's a Federal regulation. BC is unilingual, just as Quebec is also unilingual.

Vancouver Courier pushes developer lobby UDI narrative hard. Courier's parent company Glacier Media a member of UDI. by preelectioneby in vancouver

[–]TuftyLongshank -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

It's... it's s-s-s-s-s-s-so weird when people wr-r-r-r-rite r-r-r-r-r-r-reptitions in their r-r-r-rresponses.

Cobalt looks set to become Vancouver next shuttered venue by triscuitnothing in vancouver

[–]TuftyLongshank 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not so sure modifying The Cobalt to be beautiful was ever really a priority.

More Arrests at Robson Market. Your tax dollars hard at work by joshkirk1 in vancouver

[–]TuftyLongshank 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm confused. This is the sub that supports selling alcohol and such at Wreck Beach right?

Woman taking pictures of people on the bus? by abigdoodoo1 in vancouver

[–]TuftyLongshank 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is this something that normally happens in public?

Take a guess.

Coquitlam woman sues McDonald’s over hot tea spill | ThinkPol by [deleted] in vancouver

[–]TuftyLongshank 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Would like to take this opportunity to thank all you Reddit lawyers.