Originally Posted by jimchristie (Post 1847574)

We all hate having to stay home and be so extra careful. We were used to traveling during the summer to get away from the heat and miss it.
However, I follow the number of new cases in the Villages every day. Up until recently, new cases were very few a day. After full opening, including the square at a controlled amount, cases have climbed steadily. Used to be less than 5 a day. Today was 14 new cases and I expect that will start rising exponentially if something isn't done. I don't have a clue about whether someone is destroying tickets but I also saw pictures of people in the squares, none wearing masks. This will, if not already, become a hot spot for spreading the virus. Even if I stay home, wear a mask and do my best to avoid getting the virus, this will increase the chance of getting it when I have to get groceries, other necessities like going to the doctor, dentist or whatever. Just saying if someone doesn't want to go to the squares, don't go is not a smart answer. It will increase the chance of getting it for everyone. Our chances of death are much higher than most and, even if surviving it, long term kidney and lung problems may result in an earlier death. New cases per day are climbing and more group gatherings are going to add to that fact.

Originally Posted by Windguy (Post 1847495)

Wow! You really do not understand why people don’t like seeing super-spreader events. It because they increase the percentage of people who are walking around spreading the disease, which then they might get when they are out and about taking care of necessary chores.

I has absolutely nothing to do with not wanting you to have any fun.

Originally Posted by jimjamuser (Post 1847702)

I find this post interesting. Incidentally, I liked the Mrs. Google reference! Kudos. I myself believe that a person wearing a mask has no right to challenge / yell at a non-mask wearing person. Also, a non-wearer should not yell at a mask-wearing individual. And getting close to or "in the face of" someone in that situation is NOTHING to be proud of and BRAG about. It is excessively aggressive. Better to deal with it in a less violent way. No need to escalate this mask vs maskless controversy. This is a local issue but it is part of MUCH larger forces causing social disruption and causing History to advance too rapidly for people to cope with in such a short time. WE all need to do our part and be PATIENT with one another. Do not be driven too far into opposite camps as represented by mask vs non-mask wearing - or loving the squares entertainment vs wanting to sabotage it. We are all old and mature enough to know that these current irritations will go away. Be patient and let your inner goodwill shine through.

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr (Post 1847580)

How about instead of requiring passes, the staff just counts the number of people that enter the square and stop allowing people in when they hit the number allowed. They could also count the number that leave. When leaving they could ask if their coming back and give them a re-entry pass. That way people could leave to go to the restroom. If a person leaves permanently, they could allow another person in. I read on this site that people without passes were allowed in later in the evening after many people left.

Originally Posted by Chitown (Post 1847046)

To answer your question, yes. There are many of those in The Villages that cannot handle the fact that many of us feel comfortable being out and about and socializing with others. They are so upset that we are not living our lives in our basements with our masks on. The idea that we would dare try to live normally once again makes them so upset that I would not put it past them to purchase up as many tickets as they can just to stick it to us.

Originally Posted by graciegirl (Post 1847593)

I have heard some conspiracy theories about contact tracing from people who I have always respected. I have always thought medical contact tracing was a very good thing and still do. A lot of folks here think it is a "restraint of freedom" or a "dangerous thing".

No matter my politics, I stand with Science. This little ******* is killing people and I want to continue to live in my lovely home with my treasured husband and daughter and paint my pictures and cut back my roses and swim in my pool and enjoy all the great things on Acorn T.V. My cats want me to live to.

I am pretty sure about the cats.

Well then again who knows what they are thinking....got a pretty nasty look from Mikey when he found his Tuna bowl empty...

Originally Posted by Windguy (Post 1847495)

Wow! You really do not understand why people don’t like seeing super-spreader events. It because they increase the percentage of people who are walking around spreading the disease, which then they might get when they are out and about taking care of necessary chores.

I has absolutely nothing to do with not wanting you to have any fun.

Originally Posted by jimchristie (Post 1847574)

This will, if not already, become a hot spot for spreading the virus. Even if I stay home, wear a mask and do my best to avoid getting the virus, this will increase the chance of getting it when I have to get groceries, other necessities like going to the doctor, dentist or whatever. Just saying if someone doesn't want to go to the squares, don't go is not a smart answer. It will increase the chance of getting it for everyone. Our chances of death are much higher than most and, even if surviving it, long term kidney and lung problems may result in an earlier death. New cases per day are climbing and more group gatherings are going to add to that fact.

Originally Posted by golfing eagles (Post 1847735)

You're right, of course. Truth be told I was probably at least 6 feet away. Besides, I wasn't coughing sneezing, and spraying my words, and also had tested negative several days earlier. I would never put anyone in harm's way, the medical doctrine is "primum non nocere"--which means first, do no harm. But you had to be there to see what this guy was doing, really over the top. When he left, the woman thanked me for stopping his barrage.
However, I will stick with my use of pathetic----to take action for the sole purpose of trying to control others deserves such a label

Originally Posted by jimjamuser (Post 1847837)

6 ft away is a good thing. And getting tested recently negative is a better thing - both for you and those around you. That is good that the woman felt that you supported her, so she may have felt better that a tense situation was resolved. I was just PREACHING moderation in my post. People used to have different views, but usually moderation prevailed. Today, polarization has gone WAY too far - affecting even a simple thing like a visit to the Post Office. I worry that it could push past the "do no harm" philosophy that you live by, and I endorse. Sometimes small situations spiral out of control. Sometimes whole societies and countries spiral out of control. I am powerless except to verbally endorse moderation and middle of the road thinking in this rapidly changing environment. Take care!

Originally Posted by golfing eagles (Post 1847735)

You're right, of course. Truth be told I was probably at least 6 feet away. Besides, I wasn't coughing sneezing, and spraying my words, and also had tested negative several days earlier. I would never put anyone in harm's way, the medical doctrine is "primum non nocere"--which means first, do no harm. But you had to be there to see what this guy was doing, really over the top. When he left, the woman thanked me for stopping his barrage.
However, I will stick with my use of pathetic----to take action for the sole purpose of trying to control others deserves such a label

Originally Posted by Boomer (Post 1847842)

Hello, golfing eagles,

I have not read this entire thread but your posts caught my attention and brought a question to mind.

Remember the thread from a few weeks ago when someone’s wife was alone, getting into her golf cart in a parking lot, when she was verbally assaulted by a couple of angry old guys because she had an “Evolve” bumper sticker. (irony not wasted on me considering that the men were obviously Neanderthals)

Well, if you had happened upon that scene, would you have come to her assistance also?

I hope so. But just wondering.

Boomer

Originally Posted by bragones (Post 1847527)

Abuse of the system is fueled by free tickets. If a stipend fee of something like $2.00 were charged people would likely not purchase them for an event that they didn't plan to attend. If the pool of stipend money was then raffled off as gift certificates to the merchants who pay for entertainment (less a small administrative fee) the abuse just might stop and the merchants would get traffic that the entertainment was designed to bring.