"Who is going to NashCon in August ??" Topic

nashcon.org
Nashcon 2020
August 28, 29, & 30

Still on I understand and will be an oasis for folks whose mid-summer cons were cancelled.

photos from last year: link

We plan on being there with our booth!

It might be something worth considering but it's too far off to be sure. Let's see how this Covd-19 thing is playing out then.

I'll be there!

I will be there with Time Portal Hobbies. Plenty of board games, terrain minis and books.

I will be getting ready to drive my daughter to college in Toronto so nope for me

If you run it . I will

Hopefully I will be there.

Thinking about it.

August? Now that id doable

Would I love to go to a convention? Heck yeah.

Is summer likely safer than this winter? Yes, apparently.

Do I want to risk gathering with people from around the country, in close quarters, during a pandemic of an airborne virus that has no vaccine and no good treatments yet? Nope.

Not nearby and probably too early for me as well.

What Yogi said.

Been there every year since Nashcon 2….what? mid-late 80s? Will be there.

Might try it, as my regular cons have been cancelled. Too early to tell yet.

Too early to tell yet.

Perhaps, but I know what the safe bet would be.

I am planning on going. I need a con!

America and Americans are starting to open back up with or without the state's permission. A barber shop near me opened in defiance of state orders and continues to operate a full business. Business owners need to do this and the people will support you. People will take precautions but will not allow their freedoms to be usurped by something that has killed less than 0.03% of the population.

Business owners need to do this and the people will support you. People will take precautions but will not allow their freedoms to be usurped by something that has killed less than 0.03% of the population.

So maybe an additional 10-20k+ more or less is not a big deal? Not to mention the long term debilitating effects some survivors suffer? I would say a lot more… but I will just let you read in your very nice crystal ball about what it is in my mind.

No thought to liability issues if a convention goes on despite the State's laws against public gatherings? What organization would risk that?

COVID19 Lawsuits
JUDGE MCHANEY SPEAKS HIS MIND IN FRIDAY AFTERNOON CASE
MAY 23, 2020 BY KATHY SANDS

Chief Judge Michael McHaney of Clay County had this to say at the conclusion of the case he heard yesterday afternoon (Mainer v Pritzker) in the Clay County courtroom:

"Since the inception of this insanity, the following regulations, rules or consequences have occurred: I won't get COVID if I get an abortion, but I will get COVID if I get a colonoscopy. Selling pot is essential, but selling goods and services at a family owned business is not. Pot wasn't even legal and pot dispensaries didn't even exist in this state until five months ago and, in that five months, they have become essential, but a family-owned business in existence for five generations is not.

A family of six can pile in their car and drive to Carlyle Lake without contracting COVID but, if they all get in the same boat, they will. We are told that kids rarely contract the virus and sunlight kills it, but summer youth programs, sports programs are cancelled. Four people can drive to the golf course and not get COVID but, if they play in a foursome, they will. If I go to Walmart, I won't get COVID but, if I go to church, I will. Murderers are released from custody while small business owners are threatened with arrest if they have the audacity to attempt to feed their families.

These are just a few of examples of rules, regulations and consequences that are arbitrary, capricious, and completely devoid of anything even remotely approaching common sense.

State's attorneys in this state, county sheriffs, mayors, city councils and county boards have openly and publicly defied these orders followed by threats to withhold funding and revocation of necessary licenses and certifications unless you obey. Our economy is shut down because of a flu virus with a 98 percent plus survival rate. Doctors and experts say different things weekly. The defendant cites models in his opposition. The only thing experts will agree on is that all models are wrong and some are useful.

The Centers for Disease Control now says the virus is not easily spread on surfaces. The defendant in this case orders you to stay home and pronounces that, if you leave the state, you are putting people in danger, but his family members traveled to Florida and Wisconsin because he deems such travel essential. One initial rationale why the rules don't apply to him is that his family farm had animals that needed fed. Try selling that argument to farmers who have had to slaughter their herds because of disruption in the supply chain.

When laws do not apply to those who make them, people are not being governed, they are being ruled. Make no mistake, these executive orders are not laws. They are royal decrees. Illinois citizens are not being governed, they are being ruled. The last time I checked, Illinois citizens are also Americans and Americans don't get ruled. The last time a monarch tried to rule Americans, a shot was fired that was heard around the world. That day led to the birth of a nation consensually governed based upon a document which ensures that on this day in this, any American courtroom tyrannical despotism will always lose and liberty, freedom and the constitution will always win."—Judge Michael D. McHaney, Clay County court, Mainer v. Pritzker, argued May 22, 2020.

Thank you, Judge McHaney. You said it beautifully.

Judge McHaney Speaks His Mind in Friday Afternoon Case – May 23, 2020

FILED UNDER: COVID19 LAWSUITS, SPECIAL TO THE VOICE
TAGGED WITH: CLAY COUNTY, COVID-19, ILLINOIS

Such a seditious posting is highly irresponsible. Such hyperbole with the knowledge of armed yahoos on capital steps is reprehensible. 80% of Americans think reopening too soon is a bad idea. This is not some sort of conspiracy to usurp the rights of Americans, despite the yammerings of a few highly visible yahoos..

Some people get to make outrageous unsupported claims (80% of Americans etc.), but other people have to cite sources.

Yes he said it beautifully…..beautifully inane. Conflating the COVID response to the start of the AWI is a logical fallacy of false equivalency at best and supremely stupid in the least.

Let alone scientifically ignorant. Does he really think sunlight will protect kids at summer camps? Ya, that's probably why sunny places like the south of France, Spain and Italy have little to no cases of COVID, right?

I'm totally fine with you going to a toy soldier convention to prevent your freedoms from being usurped. Have at it. I'm suddenly glad I don't live in Clay County.

…..but other people have to cite sources.

"While an increasing share of the public now say the worst of the outbreak is behind us, most Americans (80%) say strict shelter-in-place measures are worth it in order to protect people and limit the spread of coronavirus."

link

Funny the original post asked if you are going to Nashcon. Why so many posts about why you are not going or why others should not go. Why much each thread go down this avenue? Start your owning topic and just respond IF you are going.

BTC, but I have to tell everyone how dumb they are….I mean, how else would they know???

Well Bowman, we asked you to site a source and you did. However the source was from over 30 days ago, based on data collected 40 days ago. If you go to the current page of your source, the shelter-place-poll is no longer even tracked. It has been replaced by polls of how soon different groups are engaging in previous activities. link

61,000 people died from the flu a couple of years ago. More than 36,000 people died in traffic accidents I think. At what point is it ok to shut down the country and when is it not. Do we not pick an amount of deaths that are "acceptable" every year to the other risks of everyday life that we encounter without shutting down the country? Just a question as I certainly don't have all the answers, but I err on the side of letting Americans assess their own risk and act accordingly. If I am at high risk, I need to protect myself more than some other people might, but I don't have the right to destroy their business by demanding that they stay home to protect me. Just my thoughts, but I am open to the fact that there are a lot of people that do not agree with me.

>At what point is it ok to shut down the country and when is it not.

Well, clearly we do not accept the EXTRA 36,000 traffic deaths that might of occurred had not we all agreed to curtailing speeding along at 100mph just about anywhere, without seat belts, stop signs, red lights, drivers' licenses or even yellow caution signs. How usurping of liberty are those regulations? As for equivalence with the flu, clearly if the flu had the same rapid contagion rate of 1.5 million people with a mortality rate of 1% instead of .1% killing 97,000 people in a period of less than 4 months instead of a whole year we might have taken the same measures. Don't forget too, some 20% of the people who contract it but who didn't die from Covid19 are facing potentially very long term disabilities in kidney, heart and even cognitive function. It isn't like the flu, its much more like Polio.

>but I err on the side of letting Americans assess their own risk and act accordingly

All fine and good, but their defiance of common sense measures or even potentially necessary draconian measures puts many more than themselves at risk. The Yahoos will take more than themselves with them. We shouldn't be lemmings and better yet, not try to rationalize our lemming-like nature wiht false equivalence and cognitive dissonance that has the potential to lead another lemming to disability or death.

I'd go if it wasn't so far. Unlike some of the others, I am a rational adult that can weigh my own personal risks/rewards instead of needing other people to do it for me.

Beware of Dunning Kruger, TSD101, not everyone has the same skill at being sure they aren't spreading it that you have.

Beware of Dunning Kruger, TSD101, not everyone has the same skill at being sure they aren't spreading it that you have.

You truly know how to endear yourself to others with your thinly veiled insults and proclaimed moral and intellectual superiority.

By the way, I have every desire of going to it, as I do Bayou Wars but only when the number of new cases is consistently down, and the R factor less than .1. I won't even be willing to conduct my own business (I sell jewelry at music festivals and art shows) until that number is reached.

As for the "Well, clearly we do not accept the EXTRA 36,000 traffic deaths that might of occurred had not we all agreed to curtailing speeding along at 100mph just about anywhere, without seat belts, stop signs, red lights, drivers' licenses or even yellow caution signs. How usurping of liberty are those regulations?", we are allowing people to drive and just take precautions and use common sense. Why can't we do the same for this? I do not agree that we know the mortality rate as we have for the most part only tested people that have symptoms. We have only done a few very small sample of the population in general so we don't really even know what percentage of the population has it or have had it. If we don't know those things, spouting off mortality rates is not worth the oxygen it uses.

>spouting off mortality rates is not worth the oxygen it uses.

Clearly it is much more worse than the flu. 61k vs 97k deaths. in just 4-5 months out of the whole of the US. At minimum it is three times as lethal, and that is WITH measures in place albeit rather late.

I didn't say that is wasn't killing more people than the flu. What I asked is "what is the acceptable # of deaths from something before we shut down the country and potentially destroy the economy? What is that acceptable # and who gets to decide? Why are deaths from some things acceptable in the country with us continuing as normal and others not? Who gets to decide that as well? I think it is a conversation worth having.

Clearly the decision rests with elected officials, who are empowered to address emergencies…and if you don't like it vote them out later, and not via defiant attempts at intimidation with guns at the governors' place of work, as USAFpilot thinks is a good idea.

You stated that 61k deaths a year from flu was acceptable, were you not implying that 97k over a much shorter period of time, equally so? Pardon me if I am mistaken. None the less, I stand by the fact that none of us would accept 200k which easily could be the case without quarantines. It is quarantining and nothing else that has reduced the numbers, take it away and the numbers go back up.

I am not convinced that the actions by the governors calling to quarantine is what destroyed the economy per se. Many people I know were taking self quarantine seriously even before the government guidance. I was already two weeks in by the time my governor did anything. The economy would have shut down even without it out of panic, once it was evidently clear that the virus was out of the bag in our cities, despite many attempts to keep the numbers reported lower than they were in reality. It was never "either or"

No matter what, people will take necessary measures to preserve their life. Londoners went without all sorts of luxuries and past-times for long periods of time during the Blitz. We will have to do the same. The virus might make us change how we live in the long run, but we cannot think it will just magically go away just because of wishful thinking and drop our quarantine efforts. You don't leave a foxhole in the midst of a barrage, just because some safe officer in the rear tells you on the radio its going to end soon, or one of your comrades is going buggy and leaves his in a panic.

So, TSD, you have absolute trust in ME not to be spreading it at a con? you can't be absolutely sure that I am even willing to wash my hands repeatedly in the days prior to my arrival, since its clear that way too many of us were absolutely unwilling even to shower in years past!

Aethelflaeda,

Are you doing without a source of income to survive?

I know many that have been unable to work and will not survive financially if they cannot get back to work. Even some that are just now able to get back will never dig out of their economic loss. They may likely loose homes, vehicles, education, businesses and even relationships do to significant loss of income. Some with businesses will fold as their revenue stream will not be enough now.

I don't have the answer, but everyone has a different view based upon their own situation and we all need to make our choices based upon what is best for our on families.

KIm

It's going to be tough, I am currently applied for SBA loans. and I have been living off my savings, which should see me through the crisis in the short term. What to do after is hard to say.

I am not insensitive to the need of many workers to make their living but I also expect fully that long term social welfare programs ala the WPA and the New Deal are going to have to be created. I am totally against the idea of forcing an employee to go back to unsafe working conditions in order for them to buy bread, medicine and rent. I fully expect to see strikes and sickouts if they do not get reprieve. An emergency Wealth tax on the 1% will do much.

This is a conversation that needs to be somewhere else. What we are discussing here about going to a leisure event of relatively minimal economic value (I don't know a single hobbyist/vendor who solely makes his living from cons) but if there are those whose livelihoods are dependent on cons they are certainly going to need the same level of assistance and support that the unemployed waiter or hot dog vendor at a sports arena gets.

I didn't state that 61K deaths a year was my definition of acceptable. What I asked was since the people that are in authority think it is acceptable (since they have never shut the country down for this) what is the number that is not acceptable. It must be somewhere between 62k and what they "think" this eventual number is going to be. That is the question that I am asking. After they give us that answer it is up to us do decide whether we agree with that number. This however has not been stated and we get nebulous estimates as to what the eventual number of deaths is going to be. Have you stopped to think about the question…"61k deaths is acceptable, hmmmm, what number is not acceptable?" I am not asking how you personally feel about that answer but how you feel the people in charge are answering that question. There must be a demarcation point correct?

The demarcation point is quite clear. 200k is too high a figure to tolerate. 97k was too high to tolerate.

It really isn't about raw numbers though, its about perceived risk. Humans are really bad at this. Fear of something often goes beyond measurable facts. We fear covid more than we fear the flu because of the tangible evidence in the past, but we lack the skill to know what it will do in the future, and there are those who are actively misleading us to protect their egos and business empires.

We spent billions and billions, and expended many lives and maimed many more because we feared a repeat of 9/11 which only killed around 3k. We accepted many permanent losses of civil liberty in the "War on Terror" in the Patriot act and how we conduct air travel. The deaths to US soldiers in response was far greater than the number of civilians killed. Was all that plus treasure & sacrifice of civil liberty worth the risk addressed?

Ha! I've heard all that I need to hear. Thanks for the debate.

You are welcome.

…. we asked you to site a source and you did. However the source was from over 30 days ago

Granted and the Pew result from 3 weeks ago shows 68%. As things normalize, that number should fall even further, as would be expected. The point was that everyone doesn't think their freedoms are being eroded away by royal decree, as Judge McHaney so eloquently fantasizes. Some people have understandable concerns.

link