False Dichotomy
Jun. 10th, 2022 11:58 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kevin_standleeThere 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.
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.
Sarcastic translation of a wall of text
Date: 2022-06-11 08:48 am (UTC)Re: Sarcastic translation of a wall of text
Date: 2022-06-11 08:56 am (UTC)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.
Re: Sarcastic translation of a wall of text
Date: 2022-06-11 09:14 am (UTC)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.
Re: Sarcastic translation of a wall of text
Date: 2022-06-11 09:44 am (UTC)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
no subject
Date: 2022-06-11 02:15 pm (UTC)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
Re: Sarcastic translation of a wall of text
Date: 2022-06-11 04:21 pm (UTC)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.
Re: Sarcastic translation of a wall of text
Date: 2022-06-12 10:43 am (UTC)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.