47Ronin | 19 Aug 2021 12:56 p.m. PST |
Since several upcoming conventions have asked gamemasters whether they would require masks for gamers to play in their games, I thought I would take an informal poll on the subject. If you are a GM of a game for an upcoming convention (or a future club meeting), did you check the "Mask Required" box when you sent in your game(s)? Thanks in advance for your responses. Either way, hope to see you at a game soon. |
Rotundo | 19 Aug 2021 1:28 p.m. PST |
|
Stryderg | 19 Aug 2021 1:56 p.m. PST |
No. Wear one if you want to, but don't try to foist it on others. |
Pyrrhic Victory | 19 Aug 2021 1:58 p.m. PST |
Yes. No way would I run something under current conditions without either masks or a vaccine requirement |
Saber6 | 19 Aug 2021 2:14 p.m. PST |
Given the nature of the risk and the potential game environment, I would mask. I have a High Risk family member so default to safest options. |
John the OFM | 19 Aug 2021 2:43 p.m. PST |
Stating requirements for games that I will be putting on in front of strangers is not "foisting". It is exercising my rights. If someone does not like the GM's rules, nobody is twisting his arm to play. I find it amazing that people think I'm violating their "rights" if I set my own standards that nobody is forcing them to comply with. Don't like it, don't play. If my "Siege of Yorktown" game is so important to you, you can suck it up and follow my rules. If you can't suck it up, go play in the Pharsalus game at the other table. |
Frederick | 19 Aug 2021 3:10 p.m. PST |
I would say yes We certainly have locally |
Rustycop Retired 2019 | 19 Aug 2021 3:50 p.m. PST |
Ronin what about the breath mint requirement? |
etotheipi | 19 Aug 2021 3:59 p.m. PST |
|
The Nigerian Lead Minister | 19 Aug 2021 4:13 p.m. PST |
|
Rotundo | 19 Aug 2021 5:19 p.m. PST |
Yes Rusty, and perhaps some wet-wipes, like BBQ joints give out. |
TSD101 | 19 Aug 2021 5:53 p.m. PST |
No. I'm not gonna spend hours of my time trying to run a game and be heard in a noisy room while wearing a mask. |
nnascati | 19 Aug 2021 6:07 p.m. PST |
Isn't this pretty much the same thing John the OFM asked? TMP link |
kcabai | 19 Aug 2021 7:39 p.m. PST |
It all depends on the situation at the time. If the CDC, State, or County mandated masks, as GM a I would do so as well. If they did not, neither would I. I would (wait for it) "Trust the Science". |
jefritrout | 19 Aug 2021 8:02 p.m. PST |
Not require it, you can wear one if you desire. |
TMPWargamerabbit | 19 Aug 2021 8:13 p.m. PST |
Personal choice for all to mask or not. Gov't can……request….thats all. People here hold the mask to face at the doorway entrance, then remove after passing the door monitor, stuff in pocket. Hold back in place as they see the cashier then remove as they exit the store. It's a joke. As for vax carding…. $15 USD-$25 local street price gets you the exact same vax card which I have from my jab, as we have actual street hawkers here locally in So California. All filled out, signed, and stamped with actual real vax lot numbers ( phone photograph taken of the shipping manifests for numbers, by fast buck medical techs selling to dealers), and cannot be checked at any local business venue in time. Just avoid the airport and air travel. Selling like hot cakes I hear, even to enter the Federal courthouse as some claim. |
platypus01au | 19 Aug 2021 10:28 p.m. PST |
In Australia, if there is an indoor mask mandate, then you have to wear a mask. It isn't a personal choice. Other countries will obviously have different regulations. Cheers, JohnG |
Oberlindes Sol LIC | 19 Aug 2021 11:22 p.m. PST |
|
Old Contemptible | 19 Aug 2021 11:23 p.m. PST |
Only if the state and local government or convention requires it. I am fully vaccinated. It would just be easier for everyone attending and working at a game convention to be fully vaccinated. If I was running the convention I would want to see proof of vaccination. No proof, you don't get in. Here's your refund. |
etotheipi | 20 Aug 2021 5:02 a.m. PST |
If the CDC, State, or County mandated masks State and County are not "trust the science" entities. They are government entities and make policy decisions, which are fundamentallly different than science, which doesn't do "decisions". Science is about what "is". Policy is about what "should be". Policy decisions can be informed by science, but that are always informed by other things, too. State anc County, and Fed for that matter, can mandate behaviour. In fact, mandating behaviour is pretty much what government does. The CDC (in the US) has both a scientific role and a policy role. Often it is hard to distinguish where they cross over. The CDC cannot, statutorialy, mandate behaviour – they are a government support agency, not a regulatory part of the Executive. Other Agencies and the other branches can implement laws, rulings, and regulations based on those recommendations. Thus, TSA can madate masks in airports (under federal regulatory jurisdication) or the State Department and CBP can madate testing prior to entry into the country, both based on CDC guidance and recommendations. |
Stryderg | 20 Aug 2021 5:10 a.m. PST |
Stating requirements for games that I will be putting on in front of strangers is not "foisting". It is exercising my rights. Well, we disagree on the "foisting" part, but it seems that we agree on rights part. I can certainly choose to play your game (and it you put it on, you know it's going to be awesome!), or I can choose to not comply with your requirements (by missing out). Life is just a bunch of trade-offs, then we die. |
Tgerritsen | 20 Aug 2021 11:22 a.m. PST |
I ran games at Little Wars in April with masks, and enforced masking at the table. However, at the time, we had mask mandate, so it was out of my hands. Where I live right now we have a mask mandate by the county, so if I had a public game, I'd enforce masks. I've had games in my home recently (prior to the latest mask mandate) and didn't wear a mask as I knew the people and everyone was vaccinated. If I am in a public place, I will abide by the rules as set forth by the local government. I'm not going to be one of those people who tilts at windmills in a public space. If those are the rules to be there, those are the rules to be there. If I don't like it, I won't go. I won't require masks for people if there is no mandate. If I wear a mask, I'm not too worried about it as I am vaccinated and a mask plus vaccination has me feeling pretty secure, regardless of your status. If they want to wear a mask, that's fine. If they don't, that's on them. I find it pretty irrational to assume that if I am vaccinated and wearing an N95 that I will catch Covid. The odds are acceptably low to me. Despite the early fears, later scientific study showed that the chance of getting covid from casual contact is almost nil and even less if a person with covid touches a surface that I later touch. This is an airborne disease. Even Fauci called constant cleaning 'performative' in nature, so my worry about people touching miniatures and passing Covid are pretty much nil. |
USAFpilot | 20 Aug 2021 11:49 a.m. PST |
Stating requirements for games that I will be putting on in front of strangers is not "foisting". It is exercising my rights. Don't be ridiculous John, you are free to set your own rules at your table. No one feels being "foist" upon. If people don't want to wear a mask than they won't attend; it's that simple. By the way, being vaccinated doesn't mean you can't get the virus. It just means that if you do get Covid than the symptoms are less severe. Ie the "science". |
Stryderg | 20 Aug 2021 12:45 p.m. PST |
Actually, I feel that the government types are, in fact, "foisting" masks on us. Some countries have studied the "science" and concluded that masks don't mitigate the problem, and other countries have concluded the opposite. Honestly, the public has been getting lied to from the beginning so I truly don't trust any of the experts at this point. |
USAFpilot | 20 Aug 2021 2:37 p.m. PST |
I'm in agreement Stryderg. But I think HMGS as a private organization can make their own rules. And I think gamemasters are free to make their own rules too. If you don't like the rules, don't show up, I won't to a table of mask wearers. Of course mask don't protect against viruses; it even says so on the box. Even surgical masks only protect patients from bacteria, not viruses. And Israel, one of the highest vaccinated countries in the world, I think 90%, now has a spike in Covid cases. Whereas India, with their treatment of ivermectin is doing much better now. |
kcabai | 20 Aug 2021 3:25 p.m. PST |
I am not sure where you live etotheipi, but I am guessing that you have not watched the news, in the US. Every public official that declares their mandates claims their decision is "based on the science" It was in that sarcastic light that my response and comment were focused. We have already run three events during Covid, and we are 45 days away from our fourth. Your sharpshooting comments while unnecessary would carry more weight in this thread if there was experience behind it. |
SpuriousMilius | 20 Aug 2021 3:29 p.m. PST |
I registered a Weird WWII game ASAP for Millennium Con this November & I'll abide by the event's requirements as I have for the past 2 decades. The con is still 2+ months off so I doubt the situation in November is predictable. If masks are optional that means personal choice; if they're required then it's been decided by the MilliCon staff like the other rules. |
Double G | 20 Aug 2021 6:53 p.m. PST |
Instead of foisting us with all your pearls of wisdom about COVID USAFpilot, shouldn't you be pitching in with the evacuation at Kabul airport and putting all those other talents of yours to use; asking for a friend………… |
Huscarle | 21 Aug 2021 4:59 a.m. PST |
Definitely one bonus about wearing a mask, is that I didn't catch a cold last winter; probably the 1st winter ever. Although I'm double-vaccinated, I would certainly wear a mask with a bunch of strangers. Every little percentage of safety could make the difference between catching it or not. I prefer to err on the side of caution than be a complete fool. |
USAFpilot | 21 Aug 2021 5:35 a.m. PST |
Double G, obviously you have no pearls of wisdom, just snide remarks. You can't debate the issue of masks and vaccines but just go along like a lemming with what the megarich big pharma tell you. So here is a little pearl for you; the definition of vaccine: vac·cine /vakˈsēn/ noun • a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease. These experimental jabs by definition are not vaccines. They are not "prepared from the causative agent". No one knows the long term effects yet. Covid will still be with us with 100% vaccinated because it is not unique to humans. Currently, over 90% of hospitalizations in Israel for covid are among the vaccinated. link |
Stryderg | 21 Aug 2021 7:43 a.m. PST |
No, no, have been telling us that over 90% of hospitalizations are from unvaccinated people. Except that if you talk to nurses that actually work in those hospitals, it's closer to 50/50. We need to focus on good-facts instead of actual evidence. (Yeah, that's a Babylon 5 reference. Bonus points if you recognized it.) |
Double G | 21 Aug 2021 7:43 p.m. PST |
"So here is a little pearl for you; the definition of vaccine: vac·cine /vakˈsēn/ noun • a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease. These experimental jabs by definition are not vaccines. They are not "prepared from the causative agent". No one knows the long term effects yet. Covid will still be with us with 100% vaccinated because it is not unique to humans. Currently, over 90% of hospitalizations in Israel for covid are among the vaccinated." Here's a little information for you to chew on; the mRNA vaccines are made using the messenger RNA that codes for the S Spike protein. The mRNA facilitates the coding to produce the SARS Cov2 Spike protein. Therefore, IT IS a product of the causative agent. The Astra-Zeneca vaccine is made from grafting the same S Spike Protein from the SARS Cow 2 virus and grafting it onto a harmless carrier virus, a type of Adenovirus. So the vaccine IS ALSO a product of the causative agent. So, wrong and wrong, they are indeed vaccines, not "experimental jabs" like you constantly refer to them as. The reason no one is injecting the actual causative agent to elicit an immune reaction should be plainly clear to everyone by now including you ; the causative agent is too deadly and devastating to survivors. That link you provided is from Vision Times, a bunch of hacks with serious credibility issues |
etotheipi | 22 Aug 2021 7:10 a.m. PST |
Well, I try not to watch the news. I don't really care what the talking heads say. I do actually read the official documents that implment policy. Every public official that declares their mandates claims their decision is "based on the science" Ah, so if a politician says so, then it is true. No policy decision is based on the science, but informed by the science (or not) within a moral context. And I have thirty plus years experience in developing and implementing government policy. Don't be ridiculous John, you are free to set your own rules at your table. No one feels being "foist" upon. It's obvious that you don't read the studies you cite in your posts.* Maybe you could read the posts. John the OFM was responding to a post in this thread that explicity said: o. Wear one if you want to, but don't try to foist it on others. Apparently, you think Strydberg is "no one". *-----
Currently, over 90% of hospitalizations in Israel for covid are among the vaccinated. For example, read your own link. In the first pargraph and the title of the article, it is over 90% of COIVD-19 hospitalzations in one hospital in Israel are vaccinated. And if you read further (I realize you stopped before all the words in the headline), you find that the specific hospital is foremost center for geriatric, respiratory, mental health and psychotrauma care, treatment and research. The highest risk group for any communicable disease. And it's only 72 patients. This is a great demonstration that if you constrain the denominator in a ratio, you can make the number anything you want. For example, over 60% of USAF officers are convicted pedophiles. link Of course, that's over 60% of the USAF officers in a state, federal, or military prison. But, hey it's a percentage. Why quibble over the denominator? |
War Scorpio | 22 Aug 2021 7:52 a.m. PST |
+1 USAFpilot +1 Stryderg +1 kcabai |
LouisDesyjr | 22 Aug 2021 8:51 a.m. PST |
"Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine protection dropped faster than AstraZeneca's – study" link It looks like the shots all lose effectiveness over a matter of months. I would not be surprised if we found that all of the covid shots were at, or near, zero for effectiveness, by the end of next year. It would be billions of dollars spent on something that drops to zero within a matter of months; but at least all of the insiders at the companies got to cash out! It would be hilarious after all of the angst about getting/wanting/forcing/mandating covid shots it turns out that all of them were at or near zero for effectiveness. "Hey, the shots all got FDA approval September 2021 but now in December 2022 the effectiveness is near zero!" "Good thing big companies mandated everyone get a shot that now does nothing!" |
LouisDesyjr | 22 Aug 2021 2:01 p.m. PST |
kcabai What difference is it going to make in several months if (when?) the effectiveness of all covid shots are at, or near, zero? People at the start of the shots being released were very happy to hear '95% effectiveness' but really had no idea what that really meant, but now the companies themselves are releasing reports that the effectiveness is dropping every month, something like on the order of several percent. (Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine protection dropped faster than AstraZeneca's – study link ) The number report by companies is usually is the Relative Risk Reduction (RRR), mainly because it is higher so 'sounds better' for press releases. That number is a measure of "the ratio of attack rates with and without a vaccine—which is expressed as 1–RR". And that is how the shots are reported as having '95% efficiency'.
COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and effectiveness: link So then the question is, what is the Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR), which tell us what kind of reduction we can expect in the overall general population and helps put into prospective how useful any shots/vaccine is. As an example take two situations at the extremes, both have a 95% RRR but vastly different ARR. Two sets of 100,000 people; one gets the shot(s), one set does not. Scenario A: Set without shots has 90,000 cases, with shot only 4,500 cases meaning 85,500 less cases; so RRR is 95% (85,500 / 90,000) , which sounds great. The ARR is 85.5% which also sounds good ( 85,500 / 100,000 ). Scenario B: Set without shots had 1,000 cases, with shots only 50 cases meaning 950 less cases. RRR is the same 95% ( 950 / 1000 ); but ARR is much less at 0.95% ( 950 / 100,000 ) So how did the covid shots all do for ARR, even the ones at 95% RRR? Not so good, the best had a 1% to 2% ARR and the worst had 0.84%; meaning that anyone getting the shot is only getting a 1% to 2% less change of getting covid, and that is declining over time due to the shots apparently declining over time. While I am not sure how well people think the shots work, I am somewhat sure they thought the ARR was more than a percent or two.
As far as masks, one small example is from the CDC itself own Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report; March 12, 2021 / Vol. 70 / No. 10: "Association of State-Issued Mask Mandates and Allowing On-Premises Restaurant Dining with County-Level COVID-19 Case and Death Growth Rates — United States, March 1–December 31, 2020" PDF link "Daily case and death growth rates before implementation of mask mandates were not statistically different from the reference period." In short, masks did nothing. While the report does show a slight 1.8% improvement with masks, it is within the statistical band of ZERO; meaning any results observed was NOT due to masks or just 'statistical noise'. |
etotheipi | 22 Aug 2021 4:50 p.m. PST |
The conclusions of the scientists who published the above referenced report, as opposed to the thoughts of someone who made several statistical errors in their assessment of random bits of it out of context: Summary What is already known about this topic? Universal masking and avoiding nonessential indoor spaces are recommended to mitigate the spread of COVID-19.What is added by this report? Mandating masks was associated with a decrease in daily COVID-19 case and death growth rates within 20 days of implementation. Allowing on-premises restaurant dining was associated with an increase in daily COVID-19 case growth rates 41–100 days after implementation and an increase in daily death growth rates 61–100 days after implementation. What are the implications for public health practice? Mask mandates and restricting any on-premises dining at restaurants can help limit community transmission of COVID-19 and reduce case and death growth rates. These findings can inform public policies to reduce community spread of COVID-19
|
Sgt Slag | 22 Aug 2021 5:27 p.m. PST |
Gamers are free to wear a mask, or not. They are free to play in my games, or not. I will not twist their arm, either way. Instead, I would give them the freedom to choose for themselves. John the OFM's point is a two-way street. Mandates are not something I enjoy pushing on others. I trust adult gamers to make a choice for themselves, based upon their beliefs. I expect the parents/guardians of minor aged gamers to make those choices for their charges. I expect others to be mature adults, to act in an adult, responsible manner. And I will respect their decisions on how to exercise their freedom. Cheers! |
LouisDesyjr | 22 Aug 2021 8:17 p.m. PST |
etotheipi In your reading of the report, how much does using masks protect wearers? This statement is a quote directly from the report: "Daily case and death growth rates before implementation of mask mandates were not statistically different from the reference period." How should one interpret this statement? It seems pretty clear that the statement is an absolute and anything else is just details explaining it. We now have many places reporting results that had/have masks mandates and places without for over a year. In general, we see no difference and no correlation as to when places put in place masks or take them off. Multiple charts showing cases rising even after masks are put into place, plus some overlays of places with masks and without showing the same 'waves' rising and falling in tandem: PDF link Masks have been in use for over 18 months now. If they worked, they would have worked by now. The fact that covid is still spreading and going through a 4th or even 5th wave in some places would seem to indicate that masks do little to nothing. Dr. Fauci early 2020 told people to 'stop buying masks' since they were taking them away from medical facilities that needed them. Then he and the CDC recommended mask mandates, while at the same time Fauci was telling people by email that masks did nothing for covid. Then earlier this year Faucci made his 'two masks are better than one statement'. So which is it? Of course, through all of this, the covid waves have continued no matter if people in an area wore masks or not. People were told they could stop wearing masks if they got the covid shots or 'vaccines'. Then, people were told that even after they got the covid shots, or 'vaccines', that they still could get covid, still spread covid and still needed to wear masks. And of course, we now find that ALL of the covid shots seem to be losing effectiveness at the rate of 5% or so per month, so by the end of next year everyone will probably be back to zero on the shots.
Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine protection dropped faster than AstraZeneca's – study: link In general: 1: If masks work, why does anyone need a covid shot? 2: If the covid shots work, why does anyone need to wear a mask after getting one? 3: If neither masks or the covid shots work, why have people do either? The only answer I can give, that thing that these measures do is to make people feel better. The general population is so terrified of covid, even though the lifetime odds of dying from covid are on par with the lifetime odds of dying in a car accident; that something is needed to put the general population 'at ease' so they can continue to function and do the work that is needed. Those measures to make people 'feel better' are the covid shots and masks, and the reason that a number of people run around in hysterics wanting everyone around them to get the covid shots and continue to wear masks. In other postings it is why I describe the majority of the population as being broken or demoralized; people insisting that everyone does things that appear to do little to nothing to solve a problem they want fixed 'so they feel better'. Meanwhile this same group of people are probably doing all kinds of things that are having a far worse effect on their health, but do nothing about it because they do not feel like it is a problem. |
etotheipi | 23 Aug 2021 4:41 a.m. PST |
How should one interpret this statement? It seems pretty clear that the statement is an absolute and anything else is just details explaining it. Perhaps you should interpret it the way the people conducting the research did instead of drawing radically different conclusions. Saying it is absolute shows a lack of understanding of statistics. Masks have been in use for over 18 months now. If they worked, they would have worked by now. The fact that covid is still spreading and going through a 4th or even 5th wave in some places would seem to indicate that masks do little to nothing. This is the same flawed statstical argument that the "defind the police use". We have police. We have crime. Therefore, policed don't stop crime. Multiple charts showing cases rising even after masks are put into place, plus some overlays of places with masks and without showing the same 'waves' rising and falling in tandem: This is not a study, it is again randomly picking bits of data when they seem to support your conclusion and leaving out the context. It does have an anecodtal point, one that contradicts its own thesis. It shows people not wearing masks correctly. So … if your data includes people not wearing masks correctly and "everybody" does it, then the data can't show whether masks work or not. Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine protection dropped faster than AstraZeneca's – study: Read the study. P dropped from 95% to 83% and AZ from 73% to 71%. Niether dropped to zero. The conclusion by the people who conducted the study you cite says Extrapolating declines beyond the observed follow-up, both vaccines would be equally effective against PCR-positives with Ct<30 139 days (4.6 months) after the second dose and 116 days (3.8 months) against PCR-positives with symptoms.[\quote]t Ct values were significantly higher than in those unvaccinated and not previously PCR/antibody-positive (28.7 (20.4-32.9) [N=10,853]; age/sex-adjusted p=0.02). 1: If masks work, why does anyone need a covid shot?2: If the covid shots work, why does anyone need to wear a mask after getting one? Again, the absolutist argument. If one thing is not a silver bullet, then it doesn't work at all. Seatbelts. Police,. Border Security. Military Training. From the initial Trump administration CDC recommdendations, the scientific side has always said this disease needs a system of systems approach, like every other one. Also, masks (along with social distancing and limiting exposure time – it was always a pacakage deal) mitigate the spread of the disease. Vaccines, like you have been told since elementry school do not slow the spread of a disease, they keep indidivudals from gettins sick from the disease. They address two different aspects of the disease. |
kcabai | 23 Aug 2021 5:28 a.m. PST |
"And I have thirty plus years experience in developing and implementing government policy." etotheipi Sounds like he is more part of the problem than the solution. Now perhaps it is possible his work was based on the rare presence of moral context and kudos for him for that. But this is too often the exception and not the rule. |
LouisDesyjr | 23 Aug 2021 5:58 a.m. PST |
So 'how much' do masks or the shots work then? If a convention has no one with masks or shots verses having everyone with, what differences do people predict we would see? People seem to run around saying 'masks work' but never seem to cite to any number as to 'how much' they work. If the covid shots are so great, why did the companies submit an application last week for a booster, after a whole eight months? The 'covid shots are so great that we need another one after only eight months of the original ones? Seems like they need a 'booster' because the shots really don't work that well, or at all. EVERYTHING the 'experts' have told everyone all along was either wrong or a lie or both. Case in point: Lockdowns. Remember way back in March 2020 'only two weeks to flatten the curve'. Here we are over 18 months later and lockdowns are still in place in some areas and covid cases are still showing up. We destroyed large parts of the world economy for nothing. We knew from the history of The Spanish Flu of 1918 that LOCKDOWNS DO NOT WORK; but did them anyways 'because it made people feel better'. Or was that the main reason all along, to make people feel better? Many of the people who think that they are 'going to be ok' because they have some pile of money or on retirement or in a government job with guaranteed income, are going to find once all of the secondary effects of what has been done (spending trillions in papering over the economic fallout, strange shortages, paying people to basically not work for over a year, printing up 40% of the total money supply since the beginning of 2020) makes it way through the systems, are going to shocked at how much they are effected, but it will be too late. Of course, one can argue that such people making such choices will be simply getting what they deserve, and it was all their own fault, and nothing anyone else could have done would have changed the outcome. |
etotheipi | 23 Aug 2021 8:10 a.m. PST |
So 'how much' do masks or the shots work then? There are hundreds of studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of masks in controlling the spread of COVID-19. In fact, the study you cited and linked to does exactly that. I would commend you to actually read it. EVERYTHING the 'experts' have told everyone all along was either wrong or a lie or both. Well, the real problem is people who don't listen to the experts. They just look for something that seems to align with what they want and present it out of context. Case in point: Lockdowns. Remember way back in March 2020 'only two weeks to flatten the curve'. Please provide the actual quote for that. The whole quote were somebody said the event would be over in 15 days, or that the curve would flatten. Whatn was actually said was the initial control measures were a first step that would be reevaluated after fifteen days. (Side note: the White House no longer provides access to the actual words of that Presidential speech. link What was actually said was here is the plan for the first fifteen days to flatten the curve, and we will reassess what else needs to be done after that time. Fauci: The guidelines are a 15-day trial guideline to be reconsidering. It isn't that these guidelines are now going to be in effect until July.What the President was saying is that the trajectory of the outbreak may go until then. Make sure we don't think that these are solid in stone until July.Trump: Yeah. That would be the outside number. Yeah. In fact, the Surgeon General reacted within a few days to the prevailing (deliberate? stupidity based?) extrapolations from part of a sentence that he said. link Before the fifteen days started and while it was going on, the public was told fifteen days was not the "solution", it was the first part of a longer term approach. The actual report, before the "fifteen days" speech said at least 18 months: link I can't really help people if they want to listen to part of one sentence that someone says and interpret it out of context of easily publically available information that they refuse to read. |
USAFpilot | 23 Aug 2021 9:07 a.m. PST |
Speaking of medical studies, I thought this was interesting: " A recent Johns Hopkins study claims more than 250,000 people in the U.S. die every year from medical errors. Other reports claim the numbers to be as high as 440,000." link |
Milhouse | 23 Aug 2021 10:54 a.m. PST |
HMGS Admin:"Hey George. I'm really sorry but your cousin was here. Started ranting and raving. Got really loud and out of control. Tipped over a table. We had to call security to haul him out." Double G:"All because of your mask policy?" HMGS Admin: "We don't have a mask policy." |
Grumble87106 | 23 Aug 2021 3:05 p.m. PST |
The GM form for H'con asked, "Do you require players to wear masks?" I checked "Yes". I figured that if by some amazing sequence of events things are all better by November, it's easier to remove a mask requirement than to institute it. In the hypothetical case where the amazing sequence of events has made things all better, I will privately poll each player before suspending the requirement. If any player objects to removal, the mask requirement (and the masks) will remain in place. 47 Ronin, I hope to see you at Historicon. |
John the OFM | 23 Aug 2021 3:48 p.m. PST |
I seem to have become a sub-thread on this thread. Here is my position on this. My game. My rules. If I want you to wear a banana on top of your head because I believe it has juju to keep the virus away, you have two choices. 1. Wear the banana to play. 2. Don't wear the banana. Then you can't play. I'm not forcing anyone to do anything. But if you don't want to follow my rules, go play somewhere else. This may be a moot point. I really don't think that there will be any gaming conventions any time soon. |
etotheipi | 23 Aug 2021 3:56 p.m. PST |
I'm allergic. What about a plantain instead? |
Ploogak | 23 Aug 2021 5:24 p.m. PST |
|
kcabai | 23 Aug 2021 5:41 p.m. PST |
"This may be a moot point. I really don't think that there will be any gaming conventions any time soon." This one quote ranks along side "Kabul will not fall" Sage words as Nashcon just reported 550+ attendees, last weekend. And coming down the track the are two largest gaming conventions in the US. Gencon- gencon.com Origins- originsgamefair.com John are you really even going to run any games this year or the next? I remember you said in a previous thread you were not going to conventions until 2023. I am guessing you are just bored with your self imposed lockdown, and you have the need to poke the bear. |