Thanks Penelope, so far so good(ish). Regarding the language, I plan on revising our policy to specify a deadline of 4 hours before the event start time - hopefully sufficient to find alternative talent in case of a positive result yet support timely data.
-Don On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 3:15 PM Penelope Weinberger < [email protected]> wrote: > And this is (part of) the insidious problem with an often symptomless > disease. Of course if we test as a pro forma, we expect a negative result. > Don, I hope you come through quickly at remains a mild case. > ------------------------------ > *From:* Don Veino via Organizers <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Tuesday, December 20, 2022 1:57 PM > *To:* [email protected] <[email protected]> > *Cc:* Don Veino via Organizers <[email protected]>; A > list for dance organizers <[email protected]> > *Subject:* [Organizers] Re: Performer "Testing to Unmask" Policy Timing > > Liz, that makes perfect sense in retrospect. However, many venues do not > require testing for folks who remain masked and have had a "test in to > unmask" approach for performers while on stage (where they were masked > elsewhere and, until receiving a negative result, on stage as well). > > Greenfield's own central policy states: > > "Band members may unmask when on-stage for some series, but only if they > have a negative rapid test on the day of the dance. Event publicity will > clearly state whether performers may be unmasked at that specific event." > > Note there's no specific timeline stated there for when the testing shall > happen other than it be on the day of. > > That's the point I'm raising from our recent experience. > > -Don > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 1:47 PM [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > > I would have thought that anyone testing before attending or performing at > a dance would determine that their test was actually negative before > entering the hall and potentially exposing people. > Liz Sturgen > > Sent from the all new AOL app for Android > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fplay.google.com%2Fstore%2Fapps%2Fdetails%3Fid%3Dcom.aol.mobile.aolapp&data=05%7C01%7C%7C6ff1ae49b3e845cfe67508dae2bc3737%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071595257034436%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=HVLrU2kg2l0ywfqQstuuiNd%2BIuEWIP1FAeWO2P1L%2F7s%3D&reserved=0> > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 9:46 PM, Don Veino via Organizers > <[email protected]> wrote: > For those of you with a COVID policy regarding testing (particularly re: > performers "testing in" to be on stage unmasked) - please consider your > lead time and possibilities for contingency action. We'll be changing the > policy of our dance due to our experience tonight. > > Our caller (me!) tested upon arrival at the hall. Entered masked, helped > get set up going and then discovered a positive result. Thirty minutes to > the first dance, folks already en route. Best efforts made, the dance was > able to happen without me but just barely. > > We will be requiring this optional testing now to happen within a > specified period which will provide for sufficient time to react > appropriately before the event set up commences. > _______________________________________________ > Organizers mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > >
_______________________________________________ Organizers mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
