COVID-19’s Impacts on BGW

[Beachokie]

I advocate for high risk & elderly to stay home or take precautions as they choose.?
I advocate for businesses to be “allowed the right” to open and for people to choose whether they want to go there or not based on their own comfort levels. ?

preach to them.

Stay home if you aren't comfortable.

They don't want to hear it though because it's different and they want to start snitching on other people because the employee didn't wipe the seat down for 5 secs and only wiped it for 4.

 

[Beachokie]

I get the random guy feeling that some of these people are the same ones that would fly down the street at 60 when kids were playing hockey.

why? that's something that ACTUALLY puts others in danger.

 

[nick]

The mask research I see here shows that cases increased with mask mandates at a slower rate by 1.8%.

Maybe the analogy would be a reckless driver speeds down a residential neighborhood street at 60mph. Would it make a broad difference if the driver slowed down to 58.92mph? That would be 1.8% slower. Let me know what you think of that analogy, or if you have a better one.

Text I am referring to:

During March 1–December 31, 2020, state-issued mask mandates applied in 2,313 (73.6%) of the 3,142 U.S. counties. Mask mandates were associated with a 0.5 percentage point decrease (p = 0.02) in daily COVID-19 case growth rates 1–20 days after implementation and decreases of 1.1, 1.5, 1.7, and 1.8 percentage points 21–40, 41–60, 61–80, and 81–100 days, respectively, after implementation (p<0.01 for all).

The CDC Concludes: “Universal masking and avoiding nonessential indoor spaces are recommended to mitigate the spread of COVID-19.”

It appears to me that the CDC recommends you consider avoiding indoor spaces to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. If you choose to take the risk of attending the park, dining without a mask, or seeing shows, you have every right to after measuring the risks for yourself.

I believe that Busch Garden’s banner at the top of their website says it well: “Exposure to COVID-19 is an inherent risk in any public location where people are present; we cannot guarantee you will not be exposed during your visit.”

With that said, I hope the community here can come to an understanding that every person should see ALL of the information, measure the risk for themselves, and make an informed decision on whether to attend the park.

 

[Nibbins]

The mask research I see here shows that cases increased with mask mandates at a slower rate, by 1.8%.

[..]

That research is specifically for indoor dining in restaurants, during which mask wearing obviously plays barely a role, which was pointed out to you previously.

 

[warfelg]

Association of State-Issued Mask Mandates and Allowing On-Premises Restaurant Dining with County-Level COVID-19 Case and Death Growth Rates — United States, March 1–December 31, 2020

Actual article is again about restaurant dining and not more widespread use in any indoor facility.

 

[horsesboy]

So trying to get back on course a little I was told that TOTAL daily attendance for Saturday was about 6,700 and total for Sunday was about 7,300. I can't say how accurate those numbers are but I can say it came up easily in a causal conversation with an employee so I think the odds are good that they are fairly close to be correct.

 

[warfelg]

So trying to get back on course a little I was told that TOTAL daily attendance for Saturday was about 6,700 and total for Sunday was about 7,300. I can't say how accurate those numbers are but I can say it came up easily in a causal conversation with an employee so I think the odds are good that they are fairly close to be correct.

Woof. Was parts of the park still closed off or fully open? Between that and the lax attitude towards restrictions is concerning.

 

[Zachary]

Land of the Dragons and the back corner of Festa are closed. The bigger issue is that so many rides and dining locations are still shuttered. BGW can operate safely with these numbers, they just need to open more of the park. Getting all the coasters online, getting Le Scoot online, getting the kiddie flats in Land of the Dragons online, getting Trappers operating again—we need all of this stuff ASAP.

 

[Nibbins]

So trying to get back on course a little I was told that TOTAL daily attendance for Saturday was about 6,700 and total for Sunday was about 7,300. I can't say how accurate those numbers are but I can say it came up easily in a causal conversation with an employee so I think the odds are good that they are fairly close to be correct.

Is that Saturday number an average between both sessions or the total for the day?

If it was 6700 total on Saturday across 2 sessions then Sunday must have been real bad.

 

[nick]

That research is specifically for indoor dining in restaurants, during which mask wearing obviously plays barely a role, which was pointed out to you previously.

This is simply not true. Stated in the article is mask mandates first. This in a world where indoor dining is not allowed. Then, the indoor dining information is posted saying STILL having mask mandates and seeing the result of those, inserting indoor dining. It’s a progression of information.

Do you agree with Busch Gardens having indoor dining considering the CDC associates indoor dining with potential for community spread?

 

[warfelg]

The article doesn't dictate one type of dining over another:

For the purposes of this analysis, no distinction was made based on whether reopened restaurants were subject to state requirements to implement safety measures, such as limit dining to outdoor service, reduce capacity, enhance sanitation, or physically distance, or if no mandatory restrictions applied. When states differentiated between bars that serve food and bars that do not serve food, restrictions for bars that serve food were coded as restaurants and
† restrictions for bars that do not serve food were coded as bars.

 

[nick]

The article doesn't dictate one type of dining over another:

So you’re pointing out how no distinction was made between states with dining restrictions/precautions and those without?

Edit: I’m saying that doesn’t answer the question.

Increases in COVID-19 case and death growth rates were significantly associated with on-premises dining at restaurants after indoor or outdoor on-premises dining was allowed by the state for >40 days.

 

[Crunchewy]

A mask mandate does not ensure that people actually follow it (all along I have seen people not wearing masks properly or even at all an alarming amount of the time, for example at grocery stores, and certainly outside and at amusement parks) or that its enforced, but a percentage of the population will follow it, and a percentage of businesses will effectively enforce it. In spite of those limitations, a mask mandate reduced the infection rate a statistically significant amount - thank you, mask wearers. I.e. if everyone wore masks and wore them properly, the reduction in infection rates would be substantially higher.

 

[nick]

if everyone wore masks and wore them properly, the reduction in infection rates would be substantially higher.

Source?

 

[Nibbins]

Would be nice if the forum had a block feature to hide certain individuals.

 

[Crunchewy]

Source?

The very article you posted, which showed that a mask mandate does statistically significantly reduce infection rates, in spite of the fact that with your own eyes you can see that not everyone follows the mandate and that would seem to include yourself.

 

[Jonesta6]

This is simply not true. Stated in the article is mask mandates first. This in a world where indoor dining is not allowed. Then, the indoor dining information is posted saying STILL having mask mandates and seeing the result of those, inserting indoor dining. It’s a progression of information.

Do you agree with Busch Gardens having indoor dining considering the CDC associates indoor dining with potential for community spread?

Your poorly thought out point has been given and corrected multiple times by multiple people - can you please give it a fucking rest?

I personally don't give a shit what you're saying anymore but am tired of you disrespecting others by telling them they're wrong and you're right after they have repeatedly pointed out the flaws of your logic with actual data while you try to evade and deflect Every. Single. Direct. Question. That you've been asked.

I'm openly calling for panel members to recommended banning your ass unless you can give a well-reasoned on-topic explanation for your continued persistence in trying to spread false information related to the pandemic on an amusement industry forum.

 

[nick]

Your poorly thought out point has been given and corrected multiple times by multiple people - can you please give it a fucking rest?

I personally don't give a shit what you're saying but am tired of you disrespecting others by telling them they're wrong and you're right after they have repeatedly pointed out the flaws of your logic with actual data while you try to evade and deflect Every. Single. Direct. Question. That you've been asked.

I'm openly calling for panel members to recommended banning your ass unless you can give a well-reasoned on-topic explanation for your continued persistence in trying to spread false information related to the pandemic on an amusement industry forum.

I believe my post was quite on topic. It was others who took it off topic of BGW.
Quoting CDC to people as others do on this forum is not disrespect.
I am persistent because I care about BGW & my community.
“False information,” as you say, is direct from CDC.

 

[Zachary]

Would be nice if the forum had a block feature to hide certain individuals.

It does! If you go to a user’s profile, you can ignore said user.

PS: Remember, you can always contact advisory panel members if you believe a user is detrimental to your experience here. They can take action.


I’ve done all I can with @nick. Last night I sent him this:

That said, I will give you the benefit of the doubt here and say this. Speaking purely as an individual forum member who has been around here a long time, not as an admin or as an observer of the advisory panel:

Assuming you honestly do want to become a respected, positive, contributing member of the forum, if I were you, I'd use the new ignore function to hide the COVID threads from your view and just focus on posting about other topics. We've had plenty of forum members before that have held and expressed their contrarian, minority opinions on COVID. Never once have any of those people been recommended for a censure. It's not because they changed their opinions, it's because they could all identify an unwinnable argument. Instead of returning to the thread over and over again to have the same arguments day after day they just moved on to engage with the community on the matters the site is actually built around—park news and discussion.

It is my assessment that if you spent 90% of your time posting to normal threads and only contributed to the COVID threads rarely, that people around here would have no problem with you. I believe a big part of your public relations problem is that you seem to want to dominate the COVID thread with your viewpoint which is very much the minority opinion here. Stating you position once and moving on, using reactions to express your support or dissatisfaction with other people's posts—that's all far less invasive and abrasive than constantly pitching you position over and over again when people are just trying to talk about social distancing enforcement in BGW or vaccine progress in VA. That is where people are likely concluding that you're a troll and a bully—that your posting patterns seem to suggest that you are only here to stir up trouble in the COVID threads with minimal interest in other topics.

I know you probably don't believe this, but I legitimately think that if you just stopped posting in the COVID threads now that everyone knows where you stand, you'd be in great shape. Talk about park news and attractions and special events and you could become a great asset to the community. I've seen plenty of people redeem their reputations here before.

I know we've had contentious arguments, but I legitimately don't hold grudges. @Gavin used to hate the site. He's an admin now. Our rules are as lax as they are not because we like having people around that our members believe cause problems, but because we believe people grow and change and learn about the site and how they can best fit in here. If we just quickly banned people, none of that could happen. I really believe in trying to find how people can make a home here—and I honestly believe you could—but it's clear to me that that home won't be in the COVID threads.

At the end of the day, COVID is on the way out. In a year, this will almost certainly all be over. There won't be COVID threads anymore here. If you spend the next year arguing with people in the COVID thread, you'll make enemies left and right and for what? In a year it won't matter, but people will really dislike you. If you put the COVID threads aside and focused on the rest of the forum, in a year you could be a mainstay here.

Anyway, I hope this doesn't all fall on deaf ears. I really am sincerely trying to help.

It has clearly fallen on deaf ears since @nick continues to insist on monopolizing this thread with his one, single, fringe argument—derailing it from productive and informative discussions repeatedly.

If people believe he should be removed, contact your panel members.

 

[nick]

It has clearly fallen on deaf ears since @nick continues to insist on monopolizing this thread with his ideas—derailing it from productive discussions repeatedly.

If people believe he should be removed, contact your panel members.

Not my ideas. It’s the CDC. I linked it. ? Sorry, but we can’t just make up our own science.

Once again, this is targeting by the admins which is against forum policy & discrimination which is against forum policy.