Corona Virus: It's a Marathon, Not a Sprint

[Default]

Enjoy what football you can this weekend, 'cause I think we're about to see things shut down (which they probably should have been in the first place).

What plucky hero will rise from the crowd when all of your QB's are quarantining!

Don't take that from me!

[$iljanus]

Enjoy what football you can this weekend, 'cause I think we're about to see things shut down (which they probably should have been in the first place).

What plucky hero will rise from the crowd when all of your QB's are quarantining!

Don't take that from me!

It will make for a glorious sports movie as an unexpected hero takes the field...or it will be a blowout. In 2020 anything is possible!

[YellowKing]

And how is it you conclude you are not endangering anyone else.

I'm social distancing and wearing a mask at all times. That's what the state mandates as safe business operation, and I'm following it.

As a tax-paying citizen of North Carolina, I should be able to go out and support local businesses under the guidelines of the state without being guilt-tripped about it.

[LordMortis]

Just wait until the vaccine is out, the crisis is over, and it's time for the first shopping trip without masks. That'll be terrifying!

My first shopping trip without a mask won't be terrifying. My first shopping trip where hosts of others aren't wearing a mask will be terrifying.

Previous to November when the places I shop at got a bit more serious, I'd try to avoid areas with non mask wearer's/children futzing with masks/below the nose wearers. People are bit more serious now for the moment. We'll see how long that lasts/is enforced. I'll a bit freaked out two weeks after the vaccine(s) is in distribution to the public and I start to see non mask wearers because maybe they've been vaccinated, maybe they haven't. Maybe they can carry the virus without being infected, maybe they can't. That will likely be they thing to drive me to get a vaccine sooner than I otherwise would.

[malchior]

And how is it you conclude you are not endangering anyone else.

I'm social distancing and wearing a mask at all times. That's what the state mandates as safe business operation, and I'm following it.

As a tax-paying citizen of North Carolina, I should be able to go out and support local businesses under the guidelines of the state without being guilt-tripped about it.

Unfortunately the problem is other people. I just found out that we may have been exposed this weekend because of inconsiderate complete and utter assholes. We don't do anything. We go shopping and that is it. I am an investor in a brew pub and one of our friends invited us to visit there for a birthday event completely outside with a very small group. Meaning my wife, them, and one other person. What actually happened is that like a high school party, people invited each other and 15 people showed up. Including someone who just came back from visiting their son for Thanksgiving in Alabama at U of A. Another person who hosts small bubble parties every weekend including one the night before. I'm furious with these people because less importantly they weren't invited directly by the birthday boy and just crashed the event and more importantly THEY KNEW THEY JUST DID RISKY THINGS.

[Blackhawk]

Just wait until the vaccine is out, the crisis is over, and it's time for the first shopping trip without masks. That'll be terrifying!

To be clear, I meant that as a sequence of events, not as cause-and-effect.

But I will still feel exposed, almost naked the first time I go shopping without a mask.

[The Meal]

And how is it you conclude you are not endangering anyone else.

I'm social distancing and wearing a mask at all times. That's what the state mandates as safe business operation, and I'm following it.

That's terrific guidance from the state. I don't think it follows that you're not endangering anyone else (or yourself), however.

As a tax-paying citizen of North Carolina, I should be able to go out and support local businesses under the guidelines of the state without being guilt-tripped about it.

"Should" is carrying a heavy load in that sentence. Irrespective of the first part of your quote, I agree that one should be able to follow government guidelines to remain safe and ensure they're not endangering others. Whether or not that's the actual truth in reality-land...

No guilt trip from me, though. I believe in different methods (generally education) when I engage with folks deemed to be endangering me or those I care about. Of course, my primary method for protection from endangerment has been avoidance. As I get older, I see the folly of using emotional tricks to try to modify others' behaviors.

[LordMortis]

And how is it you conclude you are not endangering anyone else.

I'm social distancing and wearing a mask at all times. That's what the state mandates as safe business operation, and I'm following it.

As a tax-paying citizen of North Carolina, I should be able to go out and support local businesses under the guidelines of the state without being guilt-tripped about it.

Unfortunately the problem is other people. I just found out that we may have been exposed this weekend because of inconsiderate complete and utter assholes. We don't do anything. We go shopping and that is it. I am an investor in a brew pub and one of our friends invited us to visit there for a birthday event completely outside with a very small group. Meaning my wife, them, and one other person. What actually happened is that like a high school party, people invited each other and 15 people showed up. Including someone who just came back from visiting their son for Thanksgiving in Alabama at U of A. Another person who hosts small bubble parties every weekend including one the night before. I'm furious with these people because less importantly they weren't invited directly by the birthday boy and just crashed the event and more importantly THEY KNEW THEY JUST DID RISKY THINGS.

I wouldn't have gone in the first place but if my risk tolerance was higher and I saw the rules of the game change then I would have immediately excused myself once the rule change became apparent. Of course, I'm the guy who has seen zero people socially since before March. And my highest risk factor is that I don't get my groceries delivered or pick up, though I try to do all grocery shopping as an "I know what i want" in and out experience.

[Smoove_B]

Interestingly, it's a good example of drawing different conclusions from the same data. While it's the largest contributor if you ignore medical facilities, nursing homes, and schools, it's still a small fraction of the spread.

"However on Monday Persichilli shared some of these details, announcing that an analysis of 118 outbreaks tracked between March and October linked 16% of the identified cases to private gatherings — the largest percentage of location-associated cases, other than diagnoses connected to health care facilities, group living settings like nursing homes, and schools. She said 13% of cases were tied to daycare facilities and another 13% occurred among farmworkers."

Sorry, I meant to come back to this, but I was distracted. Once I saw the headline, I was reminded:

Restaurants appear to be among the most common public places to get infected with COVID-19, but contact tracing in most areas has been so lackluster that few health departments have been able to link disease clusters to in-person dining.

When Kaiser Health News contacted the health departments serving the 25 most populous counties in the U.S., only nine could confirm they were collecting and reporting data on potential links between restaurants and COVID cases.

Contacting tracing has become a real problem here in NJ. Last count I saw was that 60% of the people being called refused to cooperate in any way. So we know about it spreading in health care facilities, schools and nursing homes because they're regulated and obligated to report the details, but asking people to voluntarily share information about their activities is proving to be problematic. The virus is absolutely spreading (based on test and hospital data) but without contact tracing to tell us the details, we can only guess.

It isn't so much drawing different conclusions as much as it is trying to figure out how to address a problem when you have such a giant hole in the data. We know people have COVID-19, but they won't tell us what they were doing - so we can only make educated guesses knowing that restaurants, gyms, churches, and retail shopping options are all available to them. If we ordered those facilities closed and the only way it could realistically spread was through private gatherings, then we'd have more data.

Our governor today announced that starting next week, outdoor gatherings are limited to 25 people (down from 150). But this doesn't impact religious gatherings or outdoor dining. So if you want to safely avoid the virus, gather with a hundred maskless friends outside and either worship a sky king or everyone hold a Pop Tart - because the virus is ignoring large maskless groups in those categories.

[malchior]

I wouldn't have gone in the first place but if my risk tolerance was higher and I saw the rules of the game change then I would have immediately excused myself once the rule change became apparent.

I know the venue so knew the rules going in. The guy who operates it follows the rules strictly so he was enforcing masks in the building stringently and we kept our distances. Actually NY only allows no masks when sitting and drinking and he enforced that. No standing unmasked anywhere. These people just kept arriving and only after did we find out what these people had been up to. Several of us are *pissed* right now including the owner who had to stop being host to our friend and turn into the mask police for this group who wasn't supposed to be there. In the end, we did end up leaving much earlier than we wanted. It sucks because we were the people who were supposed to be there - we don't do social things so it was a shitty situation all around.

[YellowKing]

I don't think it follows that you're not endangering anyone else (or yourself), however.

There is obviously going to be some amount of risk in any behavior short of isolating, by yourself, in your home, and never leaving. I think we're arguing semantics here.

I'm taking a very small (but acceptable to me) risk by going out. Others who are also shopping are also taking a very small (but acceptable to them) risk by going out.

I think my point is - I've been working from home since March. I have canceled vacations, I have canceled sleepovers, I have canceled birthdays, I have canceled holidays, I have canceled game nights. I can count the number of different businesses I've been inside on two hands since March. I work from home every single day, and I rarely go out on the weekends. Since March. I have completely kept away from the kids' grandparents, and the kids have been kept away as well. Since March.

I believe I've sacrificed enough over the past 9 months that I can go out for a couple of hours on my one day off, and not be told I'm a dumbass or endangering others by doing so. That kind of patronizing is why you have people flouting rules and saying screw it and inviting 20 people over to their house. I've followed every rule to every letter since this began, and nothing I've done over the holidays has any way violated any of those rules or guidelines. I'm not the bad guy here.

[pr0ner]

You should post that on Reddit somewhere and see how many downvotes you get. I swear, in almost any thread there where going out during the pandemic is brought up, you're shouted at by people yelling at you to "STAY THE FUCK HOME" and never do anything anywhere.

[LordMortis]

In the end, we did end up leaving much earlier than we wanted but again we were the people who were supposed to be there so it was a shitty situation all around.

Sadly, that's all you can do. Thank the host for inviting you but explain that this is above your risk tolerance and leave. Again, for me that would have happened with the 2nd person/group not on the invite list arriving or the first if they were a mask wearing/social distancing threat. I've already been an ass at work and mentioned to my boss, my bosses boss, and HR that there are people I am not comfortable working with because of their lax approach to COVID defense and I've been fortunate that I've been backed at every turn. The company hasn't enforced changes in behavior as they should and I'm not going to die on that hill but they've basically allowed me to stay very far away, like in different HVAC systems distance from people allowed in the office but how play fast and loose with established policy.

On a personal risk tolerance note, outside of groceries and days I cannot WFH, my only contact is with my parents and since late October, even outdoors, we are back to mask wearing, which we had been forgoing outdoors since mid to late summer.

I can count the number of different businesses I've been inside on two hands since March.

Work
Meijer once
Aldi
Costco
Kroger once
Carry out from a coney island once

Two hands. Dammit. Thought I could do it in one. $1 Coney's a few weeks after restaurants opened did me in.

[malchior]

That kind of patronizing is why you have people flouting rules and saying screw it and inviting 20 people over to their house.

It might be the patronizing but when we see the number of people voting for Trump, or the antivax/antimaskers, and everything in between we are finding out that American culture has deep pockets of self-entitled assholes.

[Smoove_B]

I believe I've sacrificed enough over the past 9 months that I can go out for a couple of hours on my one day off, and not be told I'm a dumbass or endangering others by doing so. That kind of patronizing is why you have people flouting rules and saying screw it and inviting 20 people over to their house. I've followed every rule to every letter since this began, and nothing I've done over the holidays has any way violated any of those rules or guidelines. I'm not the bad guy here.

I'm not the source of your ire here, but I did want to at least add in something- the virus doesn't care. More specifically, the virus doesn't care what you've done for the last 8 months to keep it away. If you do something today that puts you at risk, you're at risk. Every day is Day 0 - every day.

To be clear, I'm not challenging your behaviors or what you did in any way. I'm just pointing out that your thoughts on how you justify going out aren't uncommon and unfortunately I've read dozens of anecdotal stories at this point from people with COVID-19 all over the United States that have said very similar things. More specifically, they've sacrificed so much and felt that [doing X] was justifiable given how much else they gave up.

I'm beyond exhausted with all this; I absolutely empathize - there aren't easy decisions here. I just fear that people get into a mindset where they think they get some type of "protective credit" for past behaviors and choices. As circulating virus levels are rapidly increasing nationwide, this is not a time to relax protocols or loosen behavioral standards. Again, not commentary on or to you - just stating it out loud.

[noxiousdog]

You should post that on Reddit somewhere and see how many downvotes you get. I swear, in almost any thread there where going out during the pandemic is brought up, you're shouted at by people yelling at you to "STAY THE FUCK HOME" and never do anything anywhere.

Unless you're part of a socially acceptable mass protest. Then it's ok.

[YellowKing]

Just to clarify, I'm not mad or upset at anyone on the forum. Just pointing out my viewpoint, as I think it is a worthy discussion.

I think without clear government guidance, we are all being forced to make our own decisions. And as long as those decisions are within the government guidance that we DO have, I don't think we have the moral high ground to judge people on the decisions they make.

People who are acting irresponsibly? Judge away.

I'm not the source of your ire here, but I did want to at least add in something- the virus doesn't care. More specifically, the virus doesn't care what you've done for the last 8 months to keep it away. If you do something today that puts you at risk, you're at risk. Every day is Day 0 - every day.

Yeah, I'm totally aware of that. If I wasn't aware of it, I wouldn't have followed every guideline so far. But I would bet money that none of you on this board have remained locked in your house since Day 1 of this pandemic, and did absolutely nothing that would be considered some level of risk for virus exposure. So I'm not sure why I'm all of a sudden being targeted because I wanted to go get some Christmas presents for my kids.

[noxiousdog]

FWIW, Fauci is still saying, "the default position should be to try as best as possible within reason to keep the children in school, to get them back to school.”

That is, of course, with local community spread caveats.

[YellowKing]

Yeah that plays into my point - my kids go to school four days a week, and my wife works at a school in person five days a week. But I can't go to Target? WTF?

[Smoove_B]

Yeah, I'm totally aware of that. If I wasn't aware of it, I wouldn't have followed every guideline so far. But I would bet money that none of you on this board have remained locked in your house since Day 1 of this pandemic, and did absolutely nothing that would be considered some level of risk for virus exposure. So I'm not sure why I'm all of a sudden being targeted because I wanted to go get some Christmas presents for my kids.

I would take that bet.

Again, I'm not targeting you (or judging your actions in any way). I'm well aware that my tolerance for risk is not the same as other - probably most. At the end of the day, everyone needs to make (and live with) decisions that work for them. My parents live next door to me, but I haven't been closer than 10' to either of them since March and our only interactions have been outside. For some people I know that sounds ridiculous, but it's what we're doing. Similarly, I get that not everyone can stay home or conduct routines from their home. My only wish is that we could have collectively made communities safer so that people could elect to engage in things that are broadly lower risk - instead of what we're seeing now. If anything I've said has sounded shame-inducing or judgemental, I want to restate that it's never been my intent, certainly not for anyone here.

[LordMortis]

I'm not the source of your ire here, but I did want to at least add in something- the virus doesn't care. More specifically, the virus doesn't care what you've done for the last 8 months to keep it away. If you do something today that puts you at risk, you're at risk. Every day is Day 0 - every day.

To be clear, I'm not challenging your behaviors or what you did in any way. I'm just pointing out that your thoughts on how you justify going out aren't uncommon and unfortunately I've read dozens of anecdotal stories at this point from people with COVID-19 all over the United States that have said very similar things. More specifically, they've sacrificed so much and felt that [doing X] was justifiable given how much else they gave up.

I'm beyond exhausted with all this; I absolutely empathize - there aren't easy decisions here. I just fear that people get into a mindset where they think they get some type of "protective credit" for past behaviors and choices. As circulating virus levels are rapidly increasing nationwide, this is not a time to relax protocols or loosen behavioral standards. Again, not commentary on or to you - just stating it out loud.

All of this. I'm a loner by nature and I'm cracking hard. The fatigue and mental breaking are taking its toll. It's a prison sentence. And if it's this bad for me, I can only imagine what it's like for those who crave the company of people outside their household. But the virus doesn't give a shit any more today than it did in March. We may have a better understanding and treatments but the virus will still do what it can in the way it does and hospitals are filling up again and better understanding and better treatment means fuckall if you can't get access to them.

And they may be a lot of anecdotes, but how many anecdotes does it take to be a trend before "we were doing everything right except this one high risk factor when our whole family got the Rona. It affected everyone differently."

None of this is judge YK. The only people I judge are the ones who expose me and mine, making our risks higher than they should be for things we have to do. I judge those people very much and if I know them, I am not likely to be forgiving of them, well, ever. I'm a bitch that way.

[Smoove_B]

Yeah that plays into my point - my kids go to school four days a week, and my wife works at a school in person five days a week. But I can't go to Target? WTF?

Risks are additive and using one risk to justify taking another risk is problematic. Ideally schools are tightly-controlled environments that are enforcing masks, density and distancing rules. In other words, sending a child to school should be lower risk (by some unknown amount) than visiting a store for retail shopping. The schools (ideally) are much more controlled, particularly in contacts and with individual behaviors. This is one of the reasons why prioritizing schools being open was a smart move. However, when a community simultaneously then allows for more random interactions (indoor dining, indoor bars, indoor retail shopping, indoor gyms, indoor religious observances, etc...) that aren't as controlled (masking, density) they're working in the opposite direction and potentially putting the more controlled environment (schools) at risk.

[Little Raven]

I think without clear government guidance, we are all being forced to make our own decisions. And as long as those decisions are within the government guidance that we DO have, I don't think we have the moral high ground to judge people on the decisions they make.

I am absolutely not throwing stones here, but I HAVE been posting article after article going into detail about how the government guidance we are getting is BAD, (from an epidemiological standpoint) and everyone (including the government) knows that it's bad....they just can't bring themselves to be honest about anything because they think that would cost them their jobs. (and in fairness, it probably would)

That said, there is more stuff on the hierarchy of needs than simply avoiding illness, and civilization is not a self-sustaining endeavor. People do ultimately need to go out and do things. I'm not about to judge anyone who isn't actively being deceitful. In my home county, COVID is absolutely raging....but it's also dirt poor. Almost nobody in that county has the kind of job you can work from home. People live in large groups and close quarters. Family is everything to people in that situation, so big gatherings are the cultural standard - every weekend every park is full to bursting with one clan gathering or another. And I'm not about to judge any of them - I'd probably do the same in their shoes.

Do what you must, and trust it will be enough.

[The Meal]

I don't think it follows that you're not endangering anyone else (or yourself), however.

There is obviously going to be some amount of risk in any behavior short of isolating, by yourself, in your home, and never leaving. I think we're arguing semantics here.

I don't think we're arguing at all. I do think that the two points of view are matters of degree. I know that my experience is living at one end of the extreme ends of those degrees (by nature of my situation: I've been out of work throughout the virus, I've got extreme asthma, my wife is immunocompromised, my wife is working from home, my daughter has lupus, my daughter has asthma, etc.).

I'm taking a very small (but acceptable to me) risk by going out.

I think that's good recognition. Masks aren't infallible, and the best we can do to avoid the virus is the best we can do. Hundreds of COVID testers have contracted the virus, and those workers look like the scientists at the end of ET with all their PPE.

I think my point is - I've been working from home since March. I have canceled vacations, I have canceled sleepovers, I have canceled birthdays, I have canceled holidays, I have canceled game nights. I can count the number of different businesses I've been inside on two hands since March. I work from home every single day, and I rarely go out on the weekends. Since March. I have completely kept away from the kids' grandparents, and the kids have been kept away as well. Since March.

I feel for folks who have small kids. I've got family in the same situation (coincidentally {?} they're also the only folks in the family who've contracted COVID). I can understand the urge, especially for extroverts and folks with small children, to get out there and do what it takes to maintain sanity. But the other side of that coin is five words: the virus does not care.

I believe I've sacrificed enough over the past 9 months that I can go out for a couple of hours on my one day off, and not be told I'm a dumbass or endangering others by doing so.

"Dumbass" = strawman. "Endangering others" = reality. To what degree it matters to you is all based on your life situation.

That kind of patronizing is why you have people flouting rules and saying screw it and inviting 20 people over to their house. I've followed every rule to every letter since this began, and nothing I've done over the holidays has any way violated any of those rules or guidelines. I'm not the bad guy here.

The virus does not care about patronizing. TBH, the virus does not care about rules. The virus does not care about guidelines. The virus doesn't care who is considered a good guy or a bad guy. The virus does not care about indignation (righteous or otherwise). The virus does not care about OOers' opinions (yours, mine, Smoove's, Kurth's, drazzil's, greengoo's, godhugh's, KKBlue's, or otherwise). We're all making risk assessments, and the best we can do is make them based on a firm understanding of reality.

I feel for you and your situation. I offer a sincere apology for my contribution to you feeling patronized by stating you've endangered others with your actions. See the second paragraph of my previous post for more related sentiments.

[YellowKing]

Yeah, I know nobody's purposefully attacking me. But I'm kind of playing the victim card to illustrate the inconsistencies.

And these inconsistencies have arisen, unfortunately, by a complete and utter failure at the federal level.

[The Meal]

I'm not sure why I'm all of a sudden being targeted

I'm sorry, I see this has blown up in the last few minutes. You even put sanity words in your post about folks doing the right thing, etc.

However, the answer to your above question is probably found here:

Just seems unsafe to go out if you're not forced to even with masks.

Nothing's going to be as safe as just sitting at home, to be sure. But at some point you've got to live according to your risk tolerance, provided you're not endangering anyone else.

And how is it you conclude you are not endangering anyone else.

Isn’t this the key? Cause, people get this part wrong consistently.

YK never said "I'm not endangering anyone else," but one could read (and Unagi, potentially did) that YK thought his behavior wasn't endangering anyone else. If you don't put "provided you're not endangering anyone else" in that sentence, I don't think you generate any of this resulting conversation.

[LordMortis]

Part of my sanity keeping mechanism is to keep the TV on, pretty much all of the time. So I turn around and they're showing a hospital in Texas so consistently full, they changed much of the grounds into treatment tents. Oi. How do you staff that?

[LawBeefaroni]

I wouldn't have gone in the first place but if my risk tolerance was higher and I saw the rules of the game change then I would have immediately excused myself once the rule change became apparent.

I know the venue so knew the rules going in. The guy who operates it follows the rules strictly so he was enforcing masks in the building stringently and we kept our distances. Actually NY only allows no masks when sitting and drinking and he enforced that. No standing unmasked anywhere. These people just kept arriving and only after did we find out what these people had been up to. Several of us are *pissed* right now including the owner who had to stop being host to our friend and turn into the mask police for this group who wasn't supposed to be there. In the end, we did end up leaving much earlier than we wanted. It sucks because we were the people who were supposed to be there - we don't do social things so it was a shitty situation all around.

I don't get this. The owner wanted to have a handful of people.over for a birthday celebration, like 4 people for a private event. Other people showed up who weren't invited. Why can't he just tell them to GTFO? Or was this just open for regular (such as it is in 2020) business and he expected it to be slow?

[YellowKing]

YK never said "I'm not endangering anyone else," but one could read (and Unagi, potentially did) that YK thought his behavior wasn't endangering anyone else. If you don't put "provided you're not endangering anyone else" in that sentence, I don't think you generate any of this resulting conversation.

Yeah, good catch Meal.

What I meant by that was "provided you're not recklessly endangering anyone else." I never meant to imply that there was zero risk even when following precautions.

[hitbyambulance]

to YK's point, the level of magical transactional-bargaining thinking among people is deeply entrenched. find a better way to engage people's wish-fulfillment fantasies in order to get through to them.

[ImLawBoy]

There was an article in the paper not too long ago about how zero tolerance policies for gatherings doesn't really work. It was in the context of people getting ready to meet with families for holidays, and it drew analogies to the early years of the AIDS epidemic and to anti-drug policies. With AIDS, public bath houses were shut down and (mostly gay) people were told to abstain. It didn't work, and drove the risky behaviors out of sight/underground. With drugs, somehow "Just say no!" didn't do the trick. The article argued that zero tolerance doesn't work, and that a better focus is on mitigating risks. With respect to the early days of AIDS, education and encouraging condom use would have been more effective. With respect to drugs, making methodone available and having people trained in dealing with ODs likely saves more lives. In a bit of an overlap between the two, needle exchange programs were helpful.

While the analogies aren't perfect, I think there are some lessons here. Shouting down those who engage in anything other than strict isolation likely isn't going to help. We see it here where a relatively mild rebuke at YK going shopping was taken as being targeted - people who are trying to do good can get defensive when they are questioned on something. In reality, his excursion was likely pretty low risk (masks, large place, probably not milling about for hours), and that's what we need to encourage for people who aren't going to stay in isolation. Masks and social distancing are condoms and needle exchange programs. Expecting 100% compliance with stay-at-home orders (which are inconsistent to begin with) is foolish, and there needs to be a better way to talk to people about mitigating risk than making them feel bad because they wanted to go to a store instead of ordering and waiting for the Amazon van to show up.

Bottom line, you aren't going to have 100% compliance, even excluding virus hoaxers. So let's encourage risk mitigation where someone goes out. Back to the article I referenced on group gatherings during the holidays, they suggested things like outdoor gatherings, separate dining rooms for different bubbles, non-food events, opening windows to encourage airflow, etc. None of these are going to be completely protective against the virus, but at least they can lower the risks somewhat.

[LordMortis]

they suggested things like outdoor gatherings, separate dining rooms for different bubbles, non-food events, opening windows to encourage airflow, etc. None of these are going to be completely protective against the virus, but at least they can lower the risks somewhat.

My high risk activity (to my parents unfortunately, as opposed to high risk for me, which is more acceptable in my book) was having my parents in my house for 20 minute on Turkey Day when mom brought over a care package. It was too cold to meet outside, so I did what you advise. We had masks on kept distance and left the door wide open, letting all the heat pour outside. I fear my house is still too closed, that I'm bringing in too much external pollutants from spending too much time in the office, and airing it out at the time of their arrival did nothing. I should have gone to their place instead but they were traveling to deliver care packages from place to place. If they do it again for XMas, I'll likely do the same thing.

[malchior]

I wouldn't have gone in the first place but if my risk tolerance was higher and I saw the rules of the game change then I would have immediately excused myself once the rule change became apparent.

I know the venue so knew the rules going in. The guy who operates it follows the rules strictly so he was enforcing masks in the building stringently and we kept our distances. Actually NY only allows no masks when sitting and drinking and he enforced that. No standing unmasked anywhere. These people just kept arriving and only after did we find out what these people had been up to. Several of us are *pissed* right now including the owner who had to stop being host to our friend and turn into the mask police for this group who wasn't supposed to be there. In the end, we did end up leaving much earlier than we wanted. It sucks because we were the people who were supposed to be there - we don't do social things so it was a shitty situation all around.

I don't get this. The owner wanted to have a handful of people.over for a birthday celebration, like 4 people for a private event. Other people showed up who weren't invited. Why can't he just tell them to GTFO? Or was this just open for regular (such as it is in 2020) business and he expected it to be slow?

It's complicated. It's open for business, it was indeed a slow night, and we kept to ourselves. However this is an extended friend group so it would have been awkward to play the 'you're crashing the event' card. Also, we didn't know about the issues until the next day. Which was aggravating. They just mentioned it in conversation and it worked back to my wife.

In the end, we kept our distance and peaced out early based on the unwelcome attendance bloom. Some of the behavior of these people would have been tacky in normal times but it really is unwelcome in a pandemic. And worse we're finding out some of our extended circle are really problematic when it comes to decision making. We had glimpses of it but now it is exposed. They don't get that their behavior brings us into a large network which was unintended by us.

It just shows that no matter what you do you just can't trust anyone anymore and that's depressing as hell. I mean one person got on an airplane, flew to Alabama, went to a college campus, came back on an airplane, and decided to crash a birthday party a day or two later. And thought nothing of it. It's infuriating and that's why this is the second and last event we're going to this entire year. The previous being an event at the same venue that was the pre-launch for the venue and stayed to a very small circle.

[Smoove_B]

Bottom line, you aren't going to have 100% compliance, even excluding virus hoaxers. So let's encourage risk mitigation where someone goes out.

All good stuff. The biggest issue, however is that states, counties and communities are all taking a different approach. For example, my county in NJ this morning just announced they're adopting a "non-interference policy" for all businesses located within county borders. In short, county officials have stated that they will not impose greater restrictions on local businesses than whatever the state decides. So instead of being able to surgically modify local operations, they're allowing a state level official to run the show (and take blame for any additional restrictions).

So any advice I could give here to OOers is always couched in what my own state is doing. If you live in Montana? the Dakotas? Complete chaos - the risk isn't comparable.

It is very similar to the HIV epidemic and shaming is absolutely the wrong strategy. Unfortunately the correct strategy was never fully and consistently implemented so we're all living in a localized COVID-19 experience right now and that's not going to change any time soon.

[LordMortis]

All good stuff. The biggest issue, however is that states, counties and communities are all taking a different approach. For example, my county in NJ this morning just announced they're adopting a "non-interference policy" for all businesses located within county borders. In short, county officials have stated that they will not impose greater restrictions on local businesses than whatever the state decides. So instead of being able to surgically modify local operations, they're allowing a state level official to run the show (and take blame for any additional restrictions).

So any advice I could give here to OOers is always couched in what my own state is doing. If you live in Montana? the Dakotas? Complete chaos - the risk isn't comparable.

It is very similar to the HIV epidemic and shaming is absolutely the wrong strategy. Unfortunately the correct strategy was never fully and consistently implemented so we're all living in a localized COVID-19 experience right now and that's not going to change any time soon.

Or you could live in Michigan where we believe gubernatorial EOs are illegal but presidential EOs are saving us from government over reach and will brandish our long arms to defend our freedom to impose the will of the Federal Executive and we'll occasionally kill employees of work places that tell us masks are required by store policy.

Edit, oh, and local police in some jurisdictions will publicize their refusal to enforce the laws/order as if this is some sort of freedom fighting civil disobedience, when said orders are already explicitly not being enforced.

[LawBeefaroni]

I am supposed to preside over a tree lighting ceremony this weekend. Usually draws a few hundred people but it's "virtual" this year. So now I get to go on site and pre-record a message for the online stream.

Weird times. But no complaints from me on this one.

[Skinypupy]

https://mobile.twitter.com/kaitlancolli ... 3867187201

Dr. Scott Atlas has resigned, CNN confirms.

grumpycatgood.jpg

[Holman]

https://mobile.twitter.com/kaitlancolli ... 3867187201

Dr. Scott Atlas has resigned, CNN confirms.

grumpycatgood.jpg

What?? He was so close to 270,000!!

[malchior]

It's almost like when his ability to get something out of Trump ended that his interest in "saving lives" did too. They are claiming he couldn't work any longer in his special status since it was "time limited". Oh bullshit. We haven't had a true head of DHS in years.

[Lassr]

We just got notification to see if we (MSFC) had the capability to store vaccines at -92F. Wow, that is cold.