Suggestions to reunite the demoscene
category: parties [glöplog]
Even a small gesture would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your understanding.
And if the gesture is that I refuse to take the risk of you getting infected by not allowing you to be exposed to that threat?
to throw some oil onto the fire:
with the increase in entrance price, how many people with low incomes would this exclude? would the measure actually have more people attend, or will it cause more people to not be able to attend due to financial reasons?
Quote:
1. Allow negative test results as admittance to the party
Most people will be able to attend but it comes with a number of problems:
- Tests have to be done at least once a day, even if a person presents a negative test result upon entry. Therefore on-locatoin testing has to be done
- Tests are expensive and should be done by medical personnel or at leasted trained staff
- Tests (especially the antigen tests) are not reliable enough for a multi-day-up-close-and-personal event such as a demoparty
- One positive (or false positive) result will end the party immeditately for all participants and might mean monetary loss for the organizers as well as damaging the image of the party (amongs frustration etc. no all accounts)
- A vaccinated person might carry the virus and pass it on to a tested, unvaccinated person
- Likelyhood to have to raise the entrance fee to accomodate testing
2. Require testing of all people, not just the unvaccinated
- Points mostly as above but with increased cost and testing capabilities at the event
- Likelyhood to have to raise the entrance fee to accomodate testing even more
with the increase in entrance price, how many people with low incomes would this exclude? would the measure actually have more people attend, or will it cause more people to not be able to attend due to financial reasons?
Very good points there.
DFox: Nothing, it couldn't be helped. Of course I'm thinking about organizing parties myself, but being a total n00b in this regard, and the circumstances... don't hold your breath.
If you try it, you'll see that it's a game full of compromises that you don't want to make :) inclusivity of access (for any reason) being just one of them.
@D.Fox
First, let me just say that I have a great deal of respect for all of the work you, and your fellow organizers have done throughout the years and continue to do. Without demoparties, the scene would be nothing but Pouet-drama. Which is one of the (many) reasons why I am so fundamentally against the lockdowns, I believe they do way more harm than good.
And I understand that as an organizer you want to be able to sleep at night, and that you don't want to feel like "you have blood on your hands". But excluding a group of people can never be the solution, no matter how justified you believe the reason is. If that's the only solution available, then the only right thing to do is to not have a party at all.
And because some people are big fans of my quotes, here is one of my favourites (in Dutch):
First, let me just say that I have a great deal of respect for all of the work you, and your fellow organizers have done throughout the years and continue to do. Without demoparties, the scene would be nothing but Pouet-drama. Which is one of the (many) reasons why I am so fundamentally against the lockdowns, I believe they do way more harm than good.
And I understand that as an organizer you want to be able to sleep at night, and that you don't want to feel like "you have blood on your hands". But excluding a group of people can never be the solution, no matter how justified you believe the reason is. If that's the only solution available, then the only right thing to do is to not have a party at all.
And because some people are big fans of my quotes, here is one of my favourites (in Dutch):
Quote:
Als we gaan, dan gaan we met z'n allen
- Lawineboys
Uhm, is that the Dutch translation of "where we go one, we go all?"
I don't believe that not having a safe event for 90+ percent of potential attendees is the solution though.
Also, we're excluding parts of the potential demoscene audience for decades. It is never and will never be possible to reach 100% of your target audience. The reasons being financial, medical, mental whatsoever - take your pick.
Maybe it feels different for you now that you are in on of those excluded groups? But we would be lying if we're not knowingly excluding lots of people every year at every party.
People have asked for a "safe room" for anxious people at revision, for dog kennels, for child-safe zones and kindergardens for years (to just name a few). But those are not always possible to include for various reasons. If you are in one of those excluded groups, I'm sorry, but then a demoparty that does not accomodate your requirements is just maybe not the right place for you to be in your situation.
For all those excluded groups, demoparties usually offer a stream or, lately, a discord audio channel to get more of a party feeling. I don't see much difference to the current situation. If there's a part of the audience that cannot safely attend, we provide a streaming alternative as it is the best we can (currently) do.
What you're asking for is to take part in a 100 meter dash without having any legs because you are not happy with the paralympics. (sorry if that offended anyone, it was not my intention and I'm at a loss for good comparisons that drive the point home).
Maybe it feels different for you now that you are in on of those excluded groups? But we would be lying if we're not knowingly excluding lots of people every year at every party.
People have asked for a "safe room" for anxious people at revision, for dog kennels, for child-safe zones and kindergardens for years (to just name a few). But those are not always possible to include for various reasons. If you are in one of those excluded groups, I'm sorry, but then a demoparty that does not accomodate your requirements is just maybe not the right place for you to be in your situation.
For all those excluded groups, demoparties usually offer a stream or, lately, a discord audio channel to get more of a party feeling. I don't see much difference to the current situation. If there's a part of the audience that cannot safely attend, we provide a streaming alternative as it is the best we can (currently) do.
What you're asking for is to take part in a 100 meter dash without having any legs because you are not happy with the paralympics. (sorry if that offended anyone, it was not my intention and I'm at a loss for good comparisons that drive the point home).
@Bombe
Now that you mention it, but don't worry, it has nothing to do with that. I believe "Q" is a bunch of bs to get people to passively "trust the plan".
@D.Fox
Neither do I, but then the only remaining solution is to not have a party at all.
Now that you mention it, but don't worry, it has nothing to do with that. I believe "Q" is a bunch of bs to get people to passively "trust the plan".
@D.Fox
Neither do I, but then the only remaining solution is to not have a party at all.
Quote:
Neither do I, but then the only remaining solution is to not have a party at all.
I still believe that an event that allows most people to attend is much better than no event at all. Not having a party is what we've done most of the past two years and it was necessary. But that necessity is no longer... well necessary for a non-marginal group of the target audience. So why deprave them from the experience? You would not tell 100% of the population to not eat a steak only because 2% can't digest the meat, would you?
Quote:
eople have asked for a "safe room" for anxious people at revision
The big difference is however, that you are not excluding people because they are anxious.
Quote:
The big difference is however, that you are not excluding people because they are anxious.
We kind of are because they won't attend Revision because we cannot provide the necessary requirement.
I'd like to point out that doing daily on-site tests isn't THAT expensive.
In theory you can get that for free from Deutsches Rotes Kreuz (DRK) in Germany, they even got a quite good fee from the state. However, for most of their organizations, that government funding is ending. They typically still will do it for free / crates of beer if you provide the tests. That would be 3,50 Euro per Person and Day.
At UC we had combined this with people coming from high-risk areas needing to bring a PCR test.
The problem of having a raised entrance fee isn't really a thing for most of us. And for those who can't afford it, there always is the social ticket where you simply don't increase the price.
As D.Fox correctly stated, this however does not solve the two problems:
- If one test comes back positive, the only reasonable thing to do is to abort the party, which suck for everyone, not just the "I am willing to take risks on my health" people.
- Some party organizers still might not be happy to run such an event putting people at risk, even if those people are aware of the risk.
Also, having an outdoor area in theory is a very good thing, especially for dancing. I'd prefer dancing outdoors. But making the outdoor area open to non-vaccinated won't work. The door at Deadline always is open, and having to constantly check or argue with the non-vaccinated is even worse when having to do that once on arrival.
Sorry Bifat, this just isn't practical.
In theory you can get that for free from Deutsches Rotes Kreuz (DRK) in Germany, they even got a quite good fee from the state. However, for most of their organizations, that government funding is ending. They typically still will do it for free / crates of beer if you provide the tests. That would be 3,50 Euro per Person and Day.
At UC we had combined this with people coming from high-risk areas needing to bring a PCR test.
The problem of having a raised entrance fee isn't really a thing for most of us. And for those who can't afford it, there always is the social ticket where you simply don't increase the price.
As D.Fox correctly stated, this however does not solve the two problems:
- If one test comes back positive, the only reasonable thing to do is to abort the party, which suck for everyone, not just the "I am willing to take risks on my health" people.
- Some party organizers still might not be happy to run such an event putting people at risk, even if those people are aware of the risk.
Also, having an outdoor area in theory is a very good thing, especially for dancing. I'd prefer dancing outdoors. But making the outdoor area open to non-vaccinated won't work. The door at Deadline always is open, and having to constantly check or argue with the non-vaccinated is even worse when having to do that once on arrival.
Sorry Bifat, this just isn't practical.
We'll see what we can do, thanks for the offer! Right now to be honest the whole pouet drama (in different topics, from multiple angles) takes away all my energy (and I'm probably not alone) to actually sit down after work and organize, you know.. the actual party. (without any additional features)
So this needs to come first, then we see. And now please all give us a break. Thanks.
So this needs to come first, then we see. And now please all give us a break. Thanks.
I don't see high chances for it to happen, because of the points already made by scamp and dfox which I fully agree. And then even more considerations come to mind and need to be cleared, like are we allowed to put an outside PA at all. Is it still a private event if we provide public facilities? Will this attract unwanted outsiders? Do we need to have Security then etc pp. It's unfortunately not that easy and not a problem that is solved by throwing money at it.
There is one final point I'd like to make on this:
Looking at how the infection rates in Germany are exploding again right now, by October all the discussions we had here (and in the other thread) may be a moot point. I find it not unlikely that by then the legal mandate might be "public events are for vaccinated/cured people only", taking those decisions out of our hands.
Looking at it this way it might make sense to just wait and see for now.
Looking at how the infection rates in Germany are exploding again right now, by October all the discussions we had here (and in the other thread) may be a moot point. I find it not unlikely that by then the legal mandate might be "public events are for vaccinated/cured people only", taking those decisions out of our hands.
Looking at it this way it might make sense to just wait and see for now.
Quote:
I was under the impression that most of the risks are associated with being indoors. A lot less risky outdoors, what with a lot of space for physical distancing and no aerosol build-up. But be that as it may, having the outdoor area be fenced off would likely also bring an own set of problems.But making the outdoor area open to non-vaccinated won't work. The door at Deadline always is open, and having to constantly check or argue with the non-vaccinated is even worse when having to do that once on arrival.
I guess the most practical solution might be to do it like in the olden days of Deadline (2019 and earlier): party is indoors, wristband-check at the building's entrance, no special facilities outdoors, as that is not an official part of the party.
People afraid of being anywhere within 10 feet of unvaccinated people may stay inside (while avoiding public transportation or supermarkets). Outside there always be dragons. =)
Throwing money at it is cheap, I know.
It would be counter to what I had in mind to complicate things with regulations in such way that people are getting controlled and chased off even from the meadows outside.
If some plastic chairs and bar tables would happen to be standing around, that would appear like a first approximation. I'm naive in such matters.
It would be counter to what I had in mind to complicate things with regulations in such way that people are getting controlled and chased off even from the meadows outside.
If some plastic chairs and bar tables would happen to be standing around, that would appear like a first approximation. I'm naive in such matters.
Come October none of this will be allowed, vaccinated or not.
Quote:
- If one test comes back positive, the only reasonable thing to do is to abort the party, which suck for everyone, not just the "I am willing to take risks on my health" people.
This is not the first time I read this argument but just so we're clear here, this implies that if someone tested positive at a vaccinated only party you'd still continue it, risking infecting the majority of the guests. If you weren't then all you do to mitigate that problem is ... not testing, so just shutting your eyes and be like "if I don't know about it it's not my responsibility"?
I think even when employing both, testing and mandatory vaccination, a classical demoparty format (multiple-day long, indoor, large group gathering \w opt. sleeping areas) may not be the best idea under the current circumstances.
Apart from that, I have to chime in with what scamp and gabbie said about the party may not happening anyways.
While I do see the "let's be more inclusive bit" *in general*, in the current situation I'd rather not have (for whatever reason) unvaccinated people at an event.
Let me elaborate.
If I understand correctly:
– Infected people are more likely to spread the virus when not vaccinated, bearing a bigger amount of it.
– So if someone at an event gets infected, the chance to spread the virus further is smaller when vaccinated.
– Unvaccinated people are more likely to catch an infection (or not suppress it significantly), both on the event itself as well as, for example, from visiting the nearby town for a meal.
– Thus, unvaccinated people have a higher chance to become a spreader in the first place.
– Unvaccinated people on some part of the spectrum choose not to take hygiene rules (especially correctly, or at all, wearing a mask and keeping a distance to others) serious.
– This makes them more likely to catch the virus pretty much everywhere it is. It does depend on factors like the kind of mask, but no mask obviously provides absolutely zero protection (or let's say "barrier") in this regard.
To sum it up, having unvaccinated people at an event makes it more likely for the virus to be brought in and spread. And those choosing not to get a shot are effectively and (disproportionately higher…ly) endangering those that really need the protection of herd immunity (not holding my breath on that one, though).
(Again, that's how I understand it at this point.)
So, as both an organizer of various events as well as an attendee, I'd prefer to protect both the vaccinated people from carelessly/ignorantly brought in infections as well as unvaccinated people who can not be vaccinated for some good reason.
Is that a solid assumption (given trust in science)?
Let me elaborate.
If I understand correctly:
– Infected people are more likely to spread the virus when not vaccinated, bearing a bigger amount of it.
– So if someone at an event gets infected, the chance to spread the virus further is smaller when vaccinated.
– Unvaccinated people are more likely to catch an infection (or not suppress it significantly), both on the event itself as well as, for example, from visiting the nearby town for a meal.
– Thus, unvaccinated people have a higher chance to become a spreader in the first place.
– Unvaccinated people on some part of the spectrum choose not to take hygiene rules (especially correctly, or at all, wearing a mask and keeping a distance to others) serious.
– This makes them more likely to catch the virus pretty much everywhere it is. It does depend on factors like the kind of mask, but no mask obviously provides absolutely zero protection (or let's say "barrier") in this regard.
To sum it up, having unvaccinated people at an event makes it more likely for the virus to be brought in and spread. And those choosing not to get a shot are effectively and (disproportionately higher…ly) endangering those that really need the protection of herd immunity (not holding my breath on that one, though).
(Again, that's how I understand it at this point.)
So, as both an organizer of various events as well as an attendee, I'd prefer to protect both the vaccinated people from carelessly/ignorantly brought in infections as well as unvaccinated people who can not be vaccinated for some good reason.
Is that a solid assumption (given trust in science)?
(Ok, so the intended indendation of the list got leveled, but it should still make sense.)
I think that any event should follow regulations, guidelines AND orgas expectations and preferences. Orgas take the whole risk and should feel comfortable about every aspect, audience will adjust to whatever they decide for the event.
