Question for anyone with the "you will alienate someone" or "everyone has a different level of risk" mindset: In other areas of life, do you consider someone's personal preference (like not wearing a mask) the same as someone's health needs (like having a health condition, or a family member who does)?
Like, how is this "both sides have a preference" narrative any different from able-bodied people being like "Oh, well, I just don't like handicapped ramps, I prefer steps"? I'm not asking to be mean or rude. I genuinely would love an explanation. I think there actually _is_ a way to please most people, and not just disregard people with medical conditions (or family with them). That is - making sure no area's dances are all mask-optional. There's a big difference between an area having _some_ mask-optional dances, sure, but if they're _all_ mask-optional. Thanks, Julian Blechner On Fri, Jan 6, 2023 at 5:56 PM John and/or Jan Bloom via Organizers < [email protected]> wrote: > As Alan said, whatever you do you will alienate someone. > > What I did with the Brunswick ECD was to ask all of the dancers > - would you dance if masks were required > - would you dance if masks were optional > and so on. > > Then I picked the rules that maximized the number of dancers. > > I realize that this is harder for Contra, where you have a lot of dancers > that you can't ask, including potential future dancers. But in my case > it seemed like the right way to do it. > > John Bloom > _______________________________________________ > 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]
