What's next?

Harvey wrote

.  In the current situation I only see three choices, shut the OT, let it run wild, or occasionally silence you and Z. .

What about: have one political thread and leave people alone?

MC2 5678F589 wrote

What about: have one political thread and leave people alone?

Harv's house, Harv's rules?

witch hobble wrote

Young enough that they weren’t paying attention 3.5 years ago?

Witch....I realize that I never answered you on this question, and now I know why!  At the time you posted it I couldn’t respond in this thread.  Must have been one of Harvey’s temporary OT politi-bans.  I honestly wouldn’t have thought this particular “political” discussion was at all contentious, but maybe the bar for any political-talk is set super low.  

I guess that’s the assumption I’ll proceed under.

But I’ll answer that question now, anyway.  Yes, the people in question, kids at the time really, would have been freshmen and sophomores in college 3.5 years ago.  Sadly, I don’t think many college freshmen and sophomores are all that politically savvy or active, but they are the adult voters coming of age now.

See you in a couple days.

Sorry for any past and future politi-sins, Harvey!

MC2 5678F589 wrote

What about: have one political thread and leave people alone?

Didn’t we have that, and you were a big part of it being closed (by request).

JTG4eva! wrote

MC2 5678F589 wrote

What about: have one political thread and leave people alone?

Didn’t we have that, and you were a big part of it being closed (by request).

No, we had a whole PolitiCrap section that was closed because it was getting shitty.

MC2 5678F589 wrote

JTG4eva! wrote

MC2 5678F589 wrote

What about: have one political thread and leave people alone?

Didn’t we have that, and you were a big part of it being closed (by request).

No, we had a whole PolitiCrap section that was closed because it was getting shitty.

And that's what would happen again so why bother on a ski blog?

I have to say, I’m glad it’s just that MC was on an unintended extended politi-ban, and not incommunicado because he was busy with corona-tragedy in the family.  I really hope grandma is doing ok!

I suppose What’s Next is an appropriate spot to talk return to new normals.  With my company being Global, and some States starting to open back up, I had a couple hour call yesterday to talk about the company’s plan for return to office operations.  Considering I was at work on 9/12, and a two foot blizzard in NYC is never enough to close the office, I like the current (now different) senior management focus.  The focus is on employee safety and health, and the fact that how we are viewed as a company going forward will be based on how we treat our employees through this crisis.  For a company (a big one) to be more focused employees than the bottom line should be refreshing to some.  Some highlights of the plan...

• No offices will be open before June 1, and major metro offices reliant upon mass transit will lag further.
• Proper social distancing when the offices do open, with staff on rotating schedules such that only 1/3 of staff are in the office at any time.
• Extensive cleaning regimens.
• While WFH will not, down the road, be the full time norm, it will be used extensively in the mid term, and be more a part of the long term than it’s ever been.
• Training to be taken before anyone can return to the office.
• Upon completed training and return to office everyone will be given a welcome back packet, which will include PPE.
• Employee health self-certification each morning before you can enter the office, done online or via an app.
• Masks required in the office, although not while sitting at your properly social distanced work station.

There are other rules related to meetings, public spaces, canteen/coffee/microwave service, etc., etc., but those are the interesting highlights.

trackbiker wrote

And that's what would happen again so why bother on a ski blog?

I agree, a single political thread will get just as shitty as a whole Politicrap section, very likely.

Why bother on a ski-blog?  Well, because even before coronavirus this seems to be more than just a ski blog, which is what makes Harvey’s corner of the inter web a little special.  It more a community (albeit small, and centered around skiing at its core, with more than a few of us being a little bit freaky in our own special ways) than just a ski blog!

this is the kind of question I was interested in- so I’m stealing these questions from the other thread

Harvey wrote

Personally I think it has to come soon. Some kind of upstate opening with travel restrictions would make sense to me.

I’m in. I don’t see an enforceable travel restriction as viable but I think if people asked for a voluntary “stay close to home” policy, people would continue to cooperate for the most part. The people that wouldn’t already aren’t and would find a way around a more onerous travel ban anyway.

MC2 5678F589 wrote

campgottagopee wrote

. The rest of us just want our little piece of our world back.

What does this mean to you?

Are you saying full "back to normal"? Or are you saying: everything open, but restrictions (no gatherings, mandatory social distance + masks if you can't get 6 ft., etc.)?

I’m curious to hear more too. My own view is, upstate should open most stuff back up with the lower occupancy standards, continue discouraging big gatherings, encouraging social distancing, masks etc... and monitor developments closely. I don’t think NYC is necessarily ready for this. The potential for things blowing up there again seems to remain so the metro area unfortunately should proceed more carefully.

I feel like the human race will be more susceptible to future viruses if we go crazy with the cleaning, masks and social distancing after this thing passes.

Like, maybe we're done shaking hands forever, but how closed off are we gonna be after this initial hospital capacity threat is over? (It looks like it's almost over now up here)

I don’t disagree.  Natural (and herd) immunity come through exposure.  Eliminate exposure and you compromise immunity.  Back to the whole “a certain level of sickness and death is to be expected/accepted” discussion.  We can’t all become bubble boys and girls.



Interestingly, the UK just modified its conditions for reopening their economy.  The last condition had said something along the lines of ‘adequate monitoring and tracking of new infections’, which was amended to something like ‘adequate monitoring and tracking of new infections that would overwhelm the National Health System’.  This change is significant because it will make it easier to meet the conditions to reopen.  Even during the height of the crisis (assuming they are past that) the NHS was never overwhelmed.  The takeaway for me is that, because we can’t do this forever, nor live in a bubble, sickness and death is to be expected.

Generally I want to let most stuff slide. If you've been here since 2010, you've seen that.

MC is a master at bringing in ideas without using specifically political terms, while knowing where they'll lead with Z, JT and a few others.  He enjoys arguing, hey that's his thing.  I can try to point that out, parse every word and try to be perfect, but I don't have the time or want to put in the effort.  It's way easier to just say no. :)

Z has this idea that he is inherently right about everything, so that nothing he says is political, it's just a fact. Not really as clever as MC, but still a problem.  Attributing the $600 unemployment payment to one side, is an example of that.  He also acts like he wants no part of politics, but if you go back and look at the beginning, he was a driving force behind the politics test.

All this is said with love, hope to ski with both MC and Z next season.

What's coming out of your company sounds pretty good to me JT.

I think in the long run the problem will be solved from the bottom up, with some help from the top.

Harvey wrote

Z has this idea that he is inherently right about everything, so that nothing he says is political, it's just a fact. Not really as clever as MC, but still a problem.  Attributing the $600 unemployment payment to one side, is an example of that.

Using my ability to talk about politics without really talking about politics, I think it's important to note that politics is a compromise and each side has things that they want, and the way it works is that your side trades a little of what you want for a little of what they want.

But it becomes complicated when things that a certain side wants include "Deprive New York of Federal Money in a time of need". Like, yeah, I guess that doesn't have anything to do with skiing, until the replacement lifts that we want at Gore & Whiteface get axed because we "can't afford it".

Harvey wrote

Generally I want to let most stuff slide. If you've been here since 2010, you've seen that.

I feel as though this is true.

I feel that poking at politics in this forum is the same as not wearing a mask to the grocery store. Can you do it? Sure. It's purely a selfish thing to do.

Talking to myself here as well. No soapbox needed 😏

In the context of states reopening, I found this quote from a recent study interesting.  The gist of the most recent study was that expected death rates WILL climb when states re-open, and will climb in multiples.  Instead of 1,000 projected deaths if GA maintained social distancing longer, deaths could climb to as many as 3,000 to 9,000, depending on how quickly/fully they reopen.

“What we find, no matter what we assume, is that reopening on Monday was just too early,” said Jackson Killian, PhD student at Harvard’s John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, who worked on the models. “If you let people go out and have contact again now, you end up causing deaths that could have been avoided.”

What I find interesting about the quote is that the statements are both factual and subjective.  The thing is, the last statement is an almost universally accepted fact, I think.  Unless we completely eradicate CV-19 (which isn’t happening any time soon, if ever), no matter when you plant the “now” flag (be it Monday, next week, next month...next year), if you let people have contact (which we need to build not just the economy, but immunity) you will cause deaths that could have been avoided.  Were I MC I’d quote myself having said the same weeks ago. .

The subjective part is that, for GA, Monday was “too early”.  Given that some level of additional death is to be accepted, who’s to say Monday (resulting in who really knows...maybe an additional 4,000 deaths?) is too soon, while three months from now (with maybe only an additional 1,000 deaths?) is not?  Especially with the backdrop of tens of thousands of deaths a year accepted due to influenzas...

The problem with that is the cry babies go running behind the scene and make his life complicated.  

You were one of the cry babies weren't you.  HA  

While I had my fair share of statistics in college, I'm no expert. But that being said it appears to me that the one variable there is what percentage of people will still social distance and take all the necessary precautions verses those that don't? It seems like like people from areas harder hit take the precautions more seriously than those from areas not hit hard. The number of people protesting the closures is actually pretty small and most are likely in some sort of fringe group and would use any reason to walk around with their guns out. In any case, even if they take all restrictions away, I think most people will not be running out to restaurants and bars.

From what I understand each region is going to cancel events that would pull in many outsides.  The Sate Fair comes to mind cause our stud of a governor says so.  He reminds me of Putin