kevin_standlee | False Dichotomy

There have not been many people complaining directly to Westercon 74 about our vaccination-and-masking policy. What they don't seem to get is that the choice is not between holding the convention with our policy or holding it without such a policy. It is between holding the convention with our policy or not holding it at all because you can't run a Westercon without a committee, and nearly every member of the committee and staff would have walked away without the policy we have. Maybe you disagree with our decision, but you are not the people volunteering to run the convention, spending your own time and money to do the work to put on the event.

I hear people saying, "But the government isn't requiring it anymore." That's right, they're not. But we're not holding the convention in a state that actively wants to make people sick. (I'm looking at you, Florida.) Private entities can set whatever rules they want, and our committee — it wasn't just my decision; we discussed it at great length — decided that this is what we wanted. We did lose one committee member over it, and I understand their position; however, the rest of the committee backed this, and we're the ones who are making the convention happen.

Those people who think we shouldn't require masking and vaccination should go out and run their own conventions. If they make it very clear what they're doing, the rest of us will know to stay far away from their event or anyone attending it, because based on what I've seen, they're going to spread more disease and will spend their time denying that it was their own fault.

Meanwhile, today I am printing the cover of the Westercon 74 program book. It takes vastly longer to print than the inside pages, and because the cover pages do not have page numbers on them and the material was ready to go now, I could set it to printing well in advance of us finalizing the layout of the interior pages.

Current Mood: annoyed
Current Location: Fernley, Nevada

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

lady_laetitia

Sometimes a middle ground has to be reached because, as much as one needs committee, the convention also needs attendees. Sacrificing one for the other does no one any good. And, even more than the policy itself, the manner in which is is relayed to the attendees/public goes a long way towards determining how those attendees will view/accept it.

Good luck with your event.

From:

calimac

A middle ground to what? I for one would consider attending a convention with these policies. I would not consider attending one without them. (I'm not going to Westercon, but that's not the reason. I'm very pleased with this forthright statement by the concom.)

From:

lady_laetitia

A middle ground to meeting both the desires of the committee and the desire of the attendees. No convention survives with only one of those groups in attendance. Sometimes when making policies it means that everyone gets part of what they want but no one gets all of what they want. COVID policies are a hot topic these days, particularly as requirements in most public places are seriously relaxing and it is becoming clear that COVID is going to be here forever, just as flu is. This tends to make considering safety of the committee and attracting attendees a balancing act. Neither entity is more important than the other - both are equally required for an event to succeed.

This Westercon's requirements are, perhaps, the most stringent of any event I am aware of over the entire course of the pandemic - for example we attended an event in November 2021 with a similar policy of vaccines and masks but negative tests within 72 hours were also acceptable for those 12 and older. Children, under 12 who could wear a mask were allowed to attend. Children not old enough for the vaccine apparently cannot attend Westercon. A negative test is, so far as I can discern, is also not acceptable for Westercon's policy. Westercon requires only specific types of masks. much more involved than the masks we have all acquired over the past two plus years and one that is not always easy to find these days as places have clearanced their mask inventory.

As noted, COVID polices are a balancing act, possibly even more so now than they were even a year ago.

And, above all, with any convention policy the tone in which the information is delivered and publicly discussed by the event is incredibly important. There is a vast difference in the tone of the November event's statement of policy - we are all in this together, community taking care of each other - and the one on Westercon's website whose first paragraph is pretty harsh and off putting with threats of revocation of membership, removal from site and finally invoking law enforcement involvement for violations of a convention policy. Vast difference in the presentation of policies that are really very similar but one comes across as Draconian while the other appeals to a work together community feeling.

Like I said - tone really matters in creating and disseminating a policy.

I am unable to attend due to the COVID vaccine requirements, which is a shame since we've had attending memberships almost since they won the vote, had all our reservations and were ready for a fun road trip, but I wish the convention all possible success. For the rest of con running fandom COVID polices, what they need to entail and how to disseminate the information, is likely to be an ongoing issue as we navigate from a pandemic to an endemic virus and overly harshly strict requirements are going to become increasingly off-putting to more people than they attract.

From:

ravan

Short form: "I don't wanna vax and mask! Waaaaah! You talked mean to meee! I don't care who I kill, I wanna have fuuuun!"

Edited Date: 2022-06-11 08:49 am (UTC)

From:

lady_laetitia

FWIW I am vaccinated and regularly wear a mask, even now when places do not require it. I am also part of a convention committee that has a policy of vaccination or negative test and masks. Not to mention I noted I attended an event in November, when there was much more chance of infection than there is currently, that had, in many ways, the same overall policy as Westercon.

COVID polices and what the cover and how they are disseminated is going to be a topic that all fannish conventions have to deal with going forward. And that requires actual, adult constructive discussions.

From:

ravan

So you're just tone policing then? Sheesh!

Seriously, the Westercon committee had "adult, constructive discussions", as did the other con I attended recently and the one I am attending on the 4th of July. The fact that their conclusions aren't to your liking doesn't mean they weren't held.

Edited Date: 2022-06-11 09:18 am (UTC)

From:

lady_laetitia

I did not say I did or did not like them. The requirement of the booster and the timing of more than 14 days out simply means I am not eligible to attend. As noted I have an attending membership, we had hotel reservations. reserved a rental car and had planned a nice road trip. The booster requirement is such than neither my husband or I can attend.

And yes, tone matters. Tone mattes a lot when one is promoting one's event. The tone from the November event - with virtually the same requirements - was welcoming and invoking community. Tonopah's tone has been Draconian and off-putting. When an event wants both cooperation and attendance then invoking community for cooperation is going to work in their favor while threats work against the convention's ultimate success. Tis is likely less important for a one-off event but it is still a valid observation for con running.

The committee may have had adult discussion but this post seems to indicate that what the committee wanted was the only criteria that was considered. Again, one cannot have a convention without having both committee and attendees which does require acknowledging that there are, apparently, viewpoints other than the committee members that are equally valid in terms of a COVID policy.

Adult conversation is that which does not descend into personal attacks - as below - and canned attack rhetoric that has nothing to do with what I actually said. Two events, similar attendance numbers, very similar COVID requirements wee compared to be met with Short form: "I don't wanna vax and mask! Waaaaah! You talked mean to meee! I don't care who I kill, I wanna have fuuuun!" which is designed to do nothing but shut down actual conversation and, to be honest, leads me to also suspect you did not read what was actually written but decided to respond based on what you assumed I said.

If we cannot talk to each other without descending into personal attacks and mocking just because there are differing opinions on how to handle a particular issue then fandom is doomed to die

From:

clothsprogs

"The committee may have had adult discussion but this post seems to indicate that what the committee wanted was the only criteria that was considered. Again, one cannot have a convention without having both committee and attendees which does require acknowledging that there are, apparently, viewpoints other than the committee members that are equally valid in terms of a COVID policy."

OK, a complete outsider's viewpoint here (never been to Westercon and never likely to).

Having said that, I obviously read the post very differently from you, but when it comes down to it, the committee are the ones running the event so, basically, it comes down to what the committee says goes.

If they lose a bunch of the potential attendees as a result of that decision, it is (presumably) something they're prepared to risk, have discussed, and taken into account.

Once that decision has been made and implemented by the committee, the wishes of the potential attendees who disagree with that policy are no longer a consideration, so there's little point in telling them "Sometimes a middle ground has to be reached."

They have already reached that middle ground between Holding the event and Not holding the event.

That middle ground is holding the event with the policy in place (whether the dissenters decide to attend or not, and whether they gripe about it or not).

There will be people who disagree with the committee decision and don't attend.

There will be people who agree with the committee decision and attend.

There will be people who disagree with the committee decision, but attend anyway.

There will be people who agree with the committee decision, but don't attend.

There may even be people who disagree with the committee decision, attend anyway, but intend to ignore the policy... They can't, however, claim they haven't been clearly warned about the potential consequences of doing so.

Nobody can please all the people all the time, and with ANY decision about how something is run there are bound to be a number of people who disagree with it.

On a more personal level - As Someone who can't wear a mask, I accept that there are some events I will not be able to attend because their masking policy does not allow for it, and it would be unreasonable to expect them to make an exception for the minority that is me (and, relatively, small group of others in the same situation).

I'm not going to die from being denied the opportunity to attend by a committee decision.

Nobody who attends is going to die from being required to wear a mask.

Somebody COULD die if I attend and unwittingly infect them by not wearing a mask.

The committee have decided upon what they consider to be the best policy for preventing that from happening while still allowing them to continue with running the event.

What the committee says goes.

Teddy

From:

jreynoldsward

I'm sorry, but you're still coming across as "wah wah wah the convention isn't being run the way I want, so WAH END OF FANDOM."

I just took a pass on a much-loved convention because there were NO mask or vaccination requirements, mainly because the state it was held in explicitly does not allow vaccination or testing mandates. And...the case report from the gathering is bigger than DisCon's was, at a much higher attendance level.

The problem is people with attitudes similar to yours. And yes, I read what you said. When I read your comments, I despair of ever being able to safely attend a convention again that isn't virtual.

Edited Date: 2022-06-11 04:21 pm (UTC)

From:

lady_laetitia

No, not really. Many conventions are run in ways that are not the way I would do it but the end of fandom will come from not being able to talk to each other about differing opinions without it descending into insults and personal attacks.

If you are actually reading what I am saying without putting your personal bias into it then you are not understanding what is being said. I am in favor of mask, in favor of vaccines and have no problems with those requirements for a con. Either one I attend or one I might run.

What I am saying is there is a middle ground with those requirements - it is quite possible to have a safe convention with masks and vaccines required without the extremes of Westercon's requirement. As noted, the November con we attended required masks and vaccines but also allowed for a negative test within 72 hours of the event as well as requirements for those too young (at that time) to be vaccinated.

There is no one, set-in-stone, method to safely hold an event post-COVID

People can have honest differences of opinion and should be able to discuss them without insults or misrepresenting what is being said by either side. Once the topic veers off into personal comments then no real discussion is possible since at least one side has decided to not actually listen to what the other is saying.

From:

calimac

That you know what "the desires of the attendees are" and the desires of the rest of us aren't worth spit is exactly the position I was challenging with my question. For somebody playing tone police you sure have a questionable control of tone.

From:

lady_laetitia

A convention should listen to the desires of both its committee and attendees - who else do you think they should listen to? And if one is not either a committee person or potential attendee why would one's desires about how the event is run matter?

From:

calimac

To your repeating that the convention should listen to its attendees I can only repeat what I said in response the last time: your assumption that attendees agree with you, while the rest of us aren't worth spit, is both arrogant and offensive.

That I am not actually attending this con does not mean I can't express a perspective. (Only if we were casting a vote among attendees would I refrain.) I -am- a -potential- attendee, as I did consider going, and if it were not for other, unrelated factors, I would be going.

And - news flash - it may not have occurred to you that Westercon is not the only con needing a covid policy. And these discussions are equally relevant to other cons which I might be attending. Therefore it is not only relevant, but obligatory, for me to applaud Westercon for setting a good example for other cons.

From:

kevin_standlee

Sometimes when making policies it means that everyone gets part of what they want but no one gets all of what they want.

In fact, that's exactly what Westercon 74 ended up with. Nobody got everything they wanted. You didn't get what you want. The people who wanted an even stronger policy (which would have, among other things, meant eliminating all of the convention's planned hospitality functions) didn't get what they wanted.

Statistically, with 1 in 300 Americans having died from COVID-19 and with the projected attendance of Westercon 74 being between 200 and 300 people, we're running the risk of killing one of our members if we don't take what we consider to be reasonable precautions against infecting them. You have a higher tolerance for risk than those of us who would be on the receiving end of the lawsuit from the next of kin of the person who died because of our perceived negligence.

From:

kevin_standlee

Westercon requires only specific types of masks. much more involved than the masks we have all acquired over the past two plus years and one that is not always easy to find these days as places have clearanced their mask inventory.

And we actually referenced in the policy one manufacturer that has plenty in stock. I know. I, at my own expense, bought boxes and boxes of them and will have them available at the convention to give to people. (We are asking people for a $5 donation for the N95s if they can manage it, but the surgical masks are free.) If it was actually difficult to get N95 masks, it would be different, but it's not, and in fact, they don't even have to be purchased from China. There are multiple US-based manufacturers, but they have a difficult time finding traction because the large retailers want to buy everything from a single distributor.

From:

ravan

Thank you.

I have also purchased a number of masks that I will be taking to BayCon, to help people comply with its mask and vax policy. I'm just a dealer there. But I care enough to help out.

From:

totient

the most stringent of any event I am aware of over the entire course of the pandemic

In that case I would like to call your attention to https://www.arisia.org/YouthPolicies. No unvaccinated children of any age. We're very glad that small children will shortly be eligible for a vaccine -- though probably not quite in time for them to be fully vaccinated by Westercon. And we're sensitive to the access issues around people who can't get a vaccine at all. But I don't think Arisia will be relaxing our no-vaccine-exceptions policy any time soon.

From:

ravan

Where is there a middle ground between hosting a superspreader event and not?

I am attending another convention that weekend that has the same policy, and for the same reason. Many members of the concom are elders, immune compromised or live with people who are immune compromised. I could not attend if this type of policy was not in place - I'm over 60, my spouse is over 70, and I have immune compromised housemates.

Plus, there are a lot of people in fandom that have chronic illnesses or even are cancer survivors. There is no "middle ground" between infecting these people and not.

If people want to run a plague con, go ahead, but expect to find very few volunteers and even fewer attendees.

Quite frankly, I don't give a rat's ass if "the government" imposes restrictions or not. I was wearing a mask in 2020 before the CDC recommended it, and am wearing them still when out in public. What's the anti-masker line "My Body, My Choice"??? Well, I chose NOT to allow unmasked plague carriers to intimidate me to death.

The fact that there are so many idiots who do not give a shit about their neighbors and fannish friends is mind boggling to me. Why wouldn't I wear a mask and get a few tiny shots to protect myself, my family and my fandom friends? These are people I've known for decades, including people who's struggles with cancer and other illnesses I've followed and worried about.

Seriously, I have no patience with people who casually risk the lives of others in the name of "personal freedom". If you want to do that, go find a place in the woods and stay away from people. Otherwise, realize that *everyone* has a responsibility to suppress the spread of a highly contagious and deadly disease in our society. It's not "freedom" if you risk killing others, it's narcissism and willingness to commit negligent homicide.

There is no "middle ground" in that.

(Sorry Kevin, I get so sick of people wanting everyone else to risk their lives so that they can get away without masking and vaxxing. Yeesh!)

From:

lady_laetitia

You have gone off on a tangent and erroneous assumptions that seem incredibly counter productive and totally off the mark regarding me personally. Nowhere did I indicate I was anti-mask or anti-vaccine. Nothing in anything I said was anti-mask or anti-vaccine.

In fact I am fully vaccinated, as is everyone in my household, I wear a mask in public even when not required. I will help at an event later this year that also will require vaccines and masks and I assume that last year's November event will have similar requirements this year. FWIW, I am 70 with health issues, have a roommate with chronic health issues and a husband with chronic asthma. We have taken steps from the beginning to protect our household. I am not sure what part of that indicates to you that I am "casually risking the lives of others in the name of personal freedom"

As noted the November event we attended had essentially the same requirements - vaccine or negative test, masks at all time - that Tonopah has. Hardly the policies of a "super-spreader event". Indeed, I compared two fan run events of similar size with similar requirements and noted the very distinctive differences in the manner in which the same polices were presented to potential attendees and the additional options that were available in November that are not available in Tonopah. Again, hardly the statements of a person advocating for no mask and no vaccines. November was a safe non-super-spreader event because they reached a middle ground to accommodate both safety and people and did so without really upsetting more than a couple of people. OTOH, I've seen/heard a lot of negative discussion of Tonopah's COID requirements that, to be blunt, revolve more around how those requirements have been presented than they were over the actual requirements themselves.

So yes there is a middle ground - Mask required, yes. One specific type of mask, no
Vaccine required when possible, yes. If unable to get vaccinated then a negative test within 72 hours of event, also yes.
Hardly the policies of either a potential super spreader event or one that wants to casually risk people's lives

COVID is here to stay but few, if any events, are going to survive if they enact requirements that are more harsh than those at the height of the pandemic which is why polices need to reach the middle ground between too lax and too harsh. We are, at this point, more or less talking the difference between the precautions necessary for the height of the Spanish Flu pandemic and the precautions necessary for the ongoing annual flu we all deal with and have for decades.

However, reaching a policy that serves the needs of the most people without being too harsh or too lax requires actual discussion that does not descend into angry rhetoric and personal attacks, particularly angry rhetoric that has nothing to do with anything that has been suggested, just because there are differing views on how the issue can be best handled. If we cannot talk to each other, acknowledge that there are differing opinions on pretty much all issues facing fandom and there is not a "one size fits all" solution to any of those problems... if we cannot reach mutual agreements then fandom is doomed to death no matter how many masks are worn because problems in conrunning cannot be solved if we cannot even talk to each other rationally.

From:

kevin_standlee

And events where most of the people attending get sick aren't going to survive, either.

You may be surprised to hear this, but we've lost members because our policy isn't restrictive enough.

Eastercon had requirements that were probably more to your liking. They had a huge number of COVID cases, and that's just the ones that were reported.

We've found that if you "play nice" -- tone policing -- people will drive a train through any possible way that means they can violate your policies, and if you say, "no," they say, "But that's not what you said." In short, the worst actors are the ones who drive policies. Or to put it another way, "This is why we can't have nice things."

I'm sorry you can't attend.

From:

clothsprogs

"Eastercon had requirements that were probably more to your liking. They had a huge number of COVID cases, and that's just the ones that were reported."

Around one sixth of the number attending (around 100 of the 600 attendees) subsequently reported testing positive for Covid either at or in the days following the event was what I was told. Of course, we have no way of assessing how many didn't report that they had tested positive.

Teddy

From:

kevin_standlee

Exactly! 1/6 of the attendees is a huge outbreak IMO. Worldcon had a bunch of reported cases, but the percentage was quite small.

I'm sorry that masking policies exclude you. I know you wouldn't have been able to attend regardless, but I would have liked to have had you here in less-infectious times.

From:

lady_laetitia

At no point have I indicated I am against either a mask or vaccine requirement. We had all our reservations and upgraded memberships knowing that masks and vaccines would be required. We would be attending Westercon if the timing of when we can and will get the booster fit the timing requirements for attendance. I avoided Phoenix Fan Fusion because they dumped their COVID protocols. I wear a mask when we go out in public.

However, we are going to have to accept that COVID is here to stay and, just like the flu, there are going to be people who catch flu or COVID at cons and maybe some die. Even Westercon's strict requirements are no guarantee that no one who attends will get COVID. Events are going to have to learn what is going to be a long-term acceptable policy for COVID or, yes, small fan run events will cease to exist.

From:

lady_laetitia

Actually, the November event's policy - very similar to yours - was "playing" nice and they had full compliance on site and only two or three people that they had to turn away at registration. Nor were they a super spreader event.

From:

ravan

You are repeating yourself with the same tone policing junk.

It still sounds like "You aren't doing thing MY WAY, therefore you are evil and wrong and nasty for having a strict policy! Waaaah!"

Concoms aren't obliged to consult with you on their requirements.

Concoms are not obliged to put out mealy-mouthed policies that scofflaws can drive a Mack truck through.

Conventions are not democracies when it comes to policy. The "members" don't get to vote on policies except with their feet.

It's that simple, but you seem incapable of accepting that.

I have no more to say.

From:

kevin_standlee

No apology needed, thanks.

I foresee that we will see future conventions make it a policy that all members must waive, in writing, all liability from COVID-19 or any other infectious disease. That's draconian, but it may be the only way that groups will be willing to take on the risk. Alternatively, we'll just see all fan-run small conventions disappear, and only large, well-funded, deep-pocketed gate shows will be left.

From:

belak

There isn't a middle ground on COVID. Either you're masked and fully vaccinated, and have some protection against the virus, or you're not. Holding a meeting or convention without masks has been shown to be a superspreader event. Meeting without vaccinations has proven to be a superspreader event. What has been shown is that vaccinations give you a fighting chance at fighting the virus if infected and not ending up in hospital on a ventilator. There really isn't any middle ground to concede in the process. The lowest common denominator is to protect as many people as possible and utilize as many protections as possible, and still gather members. That is what most boards/leadership teams have been doing over the last 18 months during this pandemic to mitigate the demise of an organization.

More than a dozen friends have traveled to a variety of locations in the last two weeks. ALL OF THEM have ended up with COVID. Period. Some haven't worn masks, some have worn masks but not all around them worse masks. All have been fully vaccinated and as boosted as they can be considering the waiting periods. NONE have ended up in hospital, but some felt very poorly and wished they could get to hospital for treatment. Several of the people who traveled repeatedly tested negative despite feeling very poorly, having signs and symptoms and ending up at hospital where they tested positive. A negative home test does not mean you aren't carrying the virus. Sometimes a negative PCR test can be a positive test a day or two later, but by then, the exposure has already happened to others.

I don't have an issue with the tone or attitude of the committee, for a number of reasons. As has been implied above, give an inch and people looking for an excuse, will take a mile or more. A firm stance doesn't allow for wiggle room or blow ups at the convention, which should be a relatively enjoyable time for ALL involved.

My family and I choose not to travel or attend conventions right now because we have health concerns about circulating in small public spaces with people who may or may not be vaccinated and may or may not mask properly and who may or may not pitch a holy hell fit about the requirements. I appreciate that if we were able to attend, the requirement for masking and vaccinating is across the board and easy to interpret. No arguments, no "but I tested negative, oops, today I'm positive!". My family and I know we are missing out on events and things we would like to do. That's our choice to try and stay healthy. I'm not angry with the committee for requirements or situations that may leave us not in attendance, rather our issue is with people who think they can skirt the rules, which potentially puts the rest of us at risk; which is continuing this pandemic longer than it should extend.

As was stated, if you want to run a convention, put your blood, sweat, tears, time and money into it, have at it. They aren't as easy as one might think to manage. I appreciate the committee and their commitment to keeping the membership as safe as possible in difficult times.

From:

kevin_standlee

Thank you.

Westercon 74's policy is an evolution of the policy that last year's Worldcon had and what this one's has. I was at DisCon III, followed their policy (boosters not having been a thing then, but it was also a shorter time since our second shot), wore my mask religiously, and was, it appears, in the convention's biggest "hot spot" (the WSFS Business Meeting) longer than almost any other member, and neither I nor Lisa came down with COVID. Yes, it means we took all of our meals in our room. Yes, it means when I took a drink of water, I really did briefly drop my mask, take a sip, then pulled it back up again. I didn't use carrying a bottle of water as an excuse to leave my mask off at all times the way I have seen others doing.

Do I enjoy wearing a mask? No, but a well-fitting N95 mask like the ones I wear from DemeTECH is much better than most. And I enjoy not being sick. Both Lisa and were unwell for much of May, after having attended an in-person Westercon 74 staff meeting in Tonopah. We tested multiple times and never showed COVID positivity, and none of the people who attended the meeting reported a positive COVID test. We're still not sure if we picked up a bad cold or just had severe hay fever. It was certainly the sickest either of us have been since the pandemic, and it reminds us just how much we hate being sick.

Pre-pandemic, it appears we all just took it for granted that we were all going to get sick three or four times a year with colds and the like, and there was nothing you could ever expect to do about it.

From:

jreynoldsward

Hear hear! My family does very limited travel--in fact, we've scheduled and then cancelled several trips due to Covid concerns. I just took a pass on a much-loved convention because the state forbade them from mandating vaccinations and testing--and they decided not to go with requiring masks. Guess what? LOTS of cases being reported--and from just the ones I know about, I suspect that there are many more.

Too damn many people are taking Covid too lightly. I want to wait and see what the shakeout is from long Covid before I get too casual about attending events. I have one family member who is immunocompromised, another one who had an event that puts him at higher risk, and am at risk myself.

Plus we know too much about those who will push the boundaries, and have no desire to participate in events where we'll need to deal with people who think they can flout the rules without consequence to themselves.

The lawsuit issue is a real one. Perhaps if people have to start signing waivers about Covid, then they might take precautions seriously.

From:

kevin_standlee

If it isn't obvious, I'm very much in sympathy with your lack of travel. I haven't seen my nephew and niece (both of whom were born since the pandemic started) because I'm worried about traveling. Similarly, I must go visit my father soon at his home near Oroville, California, because there's a good chance that if I don't, I'll never get the chance again. Fortunately, he is vaccinated, boosted, and not a reality denier. (I would have been so sad if he was.)

I'm sorry you won't be at Westercon 74. I suspect that you would enjoy it. You're not allergic to non-urban areas.

From:

jreynoldsward

I am sorry as well! I had it planned before Covid. And I have books to promote, sigh, that aren't getting visibility because I won't expose myself.

From:

lady_laetitia

Again, the November event required masks and vaccines. It did not however ban all people unable to take the vaccine because it allowed a negative test within 72 hours of the event.

Unfortunately COVID is here to stay and the general public is not going to wear masks every time they leave their homes any more than they do for flu. People are going to get COVID, just as they get the flu, and that is a new normal that is going to have to be lived with. One takes the vaccine and hopes for the best but even at the height of the pandemic it was made clear that all the vaccine really does is make the case milder so the chance of hospitalization or death is minimized.

I am not angry at Westercon, disappointed we are now unable to attend even though we are vaccinated, but certainly not angry. And, just as an FYI I do work conventions and have done so for over 30 years... for awhile the second mortgage on our house was the result of succeeding failed Westercon bids in the 1990s and the travel we put in to promote those bids.

From:

kshandra

The COVID-related death coming out of Earpapalooza (the Wynnona Earp con over Memorial Day) was my friend

KecharasMoon. I could not in good conscience attend an event without a policy in place, even before that. Thank you for standing your ground here.