The Lounge is rated Safe For Work. If you're about to post something inappropriate for a shared office environment, then don't post it. No ads, no abuse, and no programming questions. Trolling, (political, climate, religious or whatever) will result in your account being removed.
So you say there is an absolute, undisputable, single answer. There is no graded scale.
Then there are only two alternatives: No joking whatsoever is acceptable. Or anything is acceptable. I suspect that you go for the first alternative.
I am not sure if the Norwegian term "galgenhumor" can be directly translated to English: "Gallows humour". It refers to the kind of jokes a delinquent makes before he is killed. Or in a more modern setting: Making jokes on in an extremely bleak situation, about that situation, to make people laugh at at to keep spirits up. A special kind of black humour, the one that is not just black, but refers to your own current situation. I dare to claim that this sort or humour has saved a few lives: When people can laugh at their own situation, they may gain the strength to survive it.
I accept that you think it is better to keep the situation as bleak as possible, smile at nothing, laugh at noting that is related to it. So you are free to ignore all such things. Consider my request to be directed at those who think humour can be an essential element in handling hardships. It is not evident how far the joking might go, and it certainly varies from one society to another, one setting to another. It is not at all obvious that a joke crossing the border line in one specific society in one specific setting could not cause a releaving laugh and give a mental push to people ina completely different setting in a completely different society.
Then there are only two alternatives: No joking whatsoever is acceptable. Or anything is acceptable.
Joking about people who have died is unacceptable, because their families are in mourning.
Joking about the reason the virus spreads through certain communities is unacceptable, because it will almost certainly be racist.
OTOH, jokes like Pompey3's saying he now farts to hide a cough is perfectly acceptable.
You should think two things, before telling a joke about the coronavirus:
0: Will I be adding to anyone's pain, by saying this?
1: Will saying this make me look like a completely heartless and/or self-centred dick?
In fact, don't restrict those rules just to jokes about the coronavirus. Apply them every time you're thinking of opening your mouth to speak -- unless, of course, you really are a heartless/self-centred/racist dick, in which case it's best if everyone knows about it.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
A horse walks into a bar. The bartender asks the horse if it's an alcoholic considering all the bars he frequents, to which the horse replies "I think not!" POOF! The horse disappears.
This is the point in time when all the philosophy students in the audience begin to giggle, as they are familiar with the philosophical proposition of Cogito ergo sum, or I think, therefore, I am.
But to explain the concept aforehand would be putting Descartes before the horse.
If you need desinfectant, just buy pure alcohol. It's cheap and abundant.
On the serious side:
In Norway it is certainly not "cheap and abundant". You may know a home destiller, with his illegal activities, but those with quality products are few and far between. The strongest you can buy in the licour stores is 60%, but according to medicals, it should be between 75 and 80% - but not any stronger.
Yet... When asking about the effect of antibaceria aids on viruses in Norwegian media, it came out (amidst the general outcry of "Never ever question advice given by health officials!") that various viruses have quite different reactions to acohol and other antibacterial measures. I have searched in vain for specific information about the Corona. Nowhere have I found trustworthy, reliable information from an health authority source saying anything specific about how Corona compares to other viruses regarding alcohol/antibac.
Honestly: I would think that this could be easily tested out and reported. I am quite sure that the health autorities do know. But nowhere do they make any Corona specific claims about the effect of alcohol/antibac.
Obviously: Making sure that your body is not weakened by any other bacteria infection makes you better prepared to stand up against Corona. So it is not a bad idea to use alcohol/antibac to fight those other threats. But I wouldn't at all be surprised if we, half a year from now, say that "Alcohol/antibac had no real effect on the Corona itself. The 'mechanical' removal, flushing it down the drain through hand washing was significant. The chemical side of alcohol/abtibac: Not so".
I just can't understand why health authorites are so reluctant to tell openly how sensitive (or possibly: non-sensitive) Corona ia to alcohol / antibac, compared to other viruses.
In Norway it is certainly not "cheap and abundant".
Alcohol does not necessarily mean ethanol. Most hand sanitizers probably use Isopropyl (rubbing) alcohol which should be available in drug stores, Walmart type stores, or hardware stores (paint department?) for a lot less than Drinkin' Alcolhol. A liter or Vodka around here will set you back at least $40. A liter of Isopropyl is about $7. So cheap, and unless the hoarders have twigged on to it, its probably plentiful, too.
Yet we know nothing about the real effect of neither ehanol nor isoproly on Corona. Is one effective, the other one not? Is either "marginally" effective, the other one "immediately"?
Briefly stated: There is no reliable information about how corona reacts to either ethanol nor to isopropyl.
I am really surprised that there isn't. I would think that it would be quite simple to come up with something Corona-specific to justify the one or the other.
I gemerally trust health authorited. But when the just hammer in "Use antibac! Use alcohol", and when you ask them for concrete evidence that it has a real effect on Corona (not on national health in general as seen in a ten year perspective), then I start questioning it. I have learnt that such questioning is BAD, and should not be brought to the public. Nevertheless, inside my own enclosed cave, I dare to ask myself: If they can't display the effect on the corona, why are they then pushing it so intensively?
So it is not a bad idea to use alcohol/antibac to fight those other threats. But I wouldn't at all be surprised if we, half a year from now, say that "Alcohol/antibac had no real effect on the Corona itself.
I would be. Similar to news that Corona can survive on silver.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.