Coronavirus - New Zealand
-
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@jc said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@rapido How shithouse is that. My workmate is getting married in 4 weeks and looks like she’s going to have to cut back heavily on the number of guests if we go Red. She’s in pieces.
Heavily? That was going to be a big wedding!
Can still do 100pax at Red
But it looks like there also needs to be 1m spacing (as well as the 100 people max). So, that will likely reduce the capacity the venue can handle.
-
a very quick read seems to suggest your Red Light is what we are under at the moment. Wear a mask, a few limits around the place. Although, at least here in Qld, they have delayed the return to school by a couple of weeks (by which time they estimate it will have peaked here)
You know, the "letting it rip" the fuckwits like to keep saying
-
@mariner4life said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
a very quick read seems to suggest your Red Light is what we are under at the moment. Wear a mask, a few limits around the place. Although, at least here in Qld, they have delayed the return to school by a couple of weeks (by which time they estimate it will have peaked here)
You know, the "letting it rip" the fuckwits like to keep saying
That's encouraging then.
Because even our orange seems to be too much for delta to reach any sort of exponentiality. So, there is hope then that omricon can 'rip' despite our light settings.
-
@rapido said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Imagine dis-inviting people from your wedding!!!
Excruciating. Would hate to be in that position.
I reckon it would be awesome. Can get rid of the people you felt obliged to invite rather than wanted to.
-
@rapido Yeah, that’s the hard bit. Everyone will understand that there needs to be cuts. But everyone will also be offended if they’re one of the cuts! It’s a shit position to be in.
Of course all the people who are real friends are first in the queue to say don’t worry about me etc, but they are the ones she actually wants there.
-
@jc said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial 160+ guests.
Although that seems a lot, I'd wager most people here could come up with half that number once they add extended family, school friends, uni friends, sporting friends, work colleagues etc.
The great difficulty isn't coming up with a big list, it's as @Rapido points out; limiting the attendees. Even worse to say you are the first off the bus...
-
@jc said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial 160+ guests.
I sympathise that she can't have what she wants on her big day but tbf she was taking a risk in her planning by going over the possible limit.
It's like people getting stuck overseas when travelling for non essential reasons. The risk was known and well spelled out. The result is shit though.I have a workmate also doing a wedding in a few weeks. It is planned to the Nth degree and she deliberately kept numbers down and let guests know they couldn't attend if un-vaxxed.
She took the approach of wanting certainty and avoiding last minute disappointment and stress.Yep, shit choices to have to make but they are choices.
-
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@jc said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial 160+ guests.
I sympathise that she can't have what she wants on her big day but tbf she was taking a risk in her planning by going over the possible limit.
With New Zealand's government, how the fuck could she plan without just trying for one of the biggest days of her life? Not sure why you feel it's ok to victim blame here.
-
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@jc said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial 160+ guests.
I sympathise that she can't have what she wants on her big day but tbf she was taking a risk in her planning by going over the possible limit.
With New Zealand's government, how the fuck could she plan without just trying for one of the biggest days of her life? Not sure why you feel it's ok to victim blame here.
I'm not victim blaming. I said it's shit that her risk didn't pay off.
It would have been great for her if it had.We've been in covid uncertainty for almost two years now
-
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@jc said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial 160+ guests.
I sympathise that she can't have what she wants on her big day but tbf she was taking a risk in her planning by going over the possible limit.
With New Zealand's government, how the fuck could she plan without just trying for one of the biggest days of her life? Not sure why you feel it's ok to victim blame here.
I'm not victim blaming. I said it's shit that her risk didn't pay off.
It would have been great for her if it had.We've been in covid uncertainty for almost two years now
It's not her fault the goverment changes plans with the wind.
-
@kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@jc said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial 160+ guests.
I sympathise that she can't have what she wants on her big day but tbf she was taking a risk in her planning by going over the possible limit.
With New Zealand's government, how the fuck could she plan without just trying for one of the biggest days of her life? Not sure why you feel it's ok to victim blame here.
I'm not victim blaming. I said it's shit that her risk didn't pay off.
It would have been great for her if it had.We've been in covid uncertainty for almost two years now
It's not her fault the goverment changes plans with the wind.
That's just silly (in this situation).
The level system was in place for ages and inviting over 100 people could only work out there in level 1 so ANY move in levels would have stuffed plans. Under the traffic lights it was clear that there would be a move to Red under a community breakout so once again 100 would be the limit.
Unless she made her guest list before March 2020 and hasn't re-thought it she has taken a risk on the country remaining in Orange. That's not from random govt changes. -
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@jc said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial 160+ guests.
I sympathise that she can't have what she wants on her big day but tbf she was taking a risk in her planning by going over the possible limit.
With New Zealand's government, how the fuck could she plan without just trying for one of the biggest days of her life? Not sure why you feel it's ok to victim blame here.
haaaave you not been reading the last couple of years?
-
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@antipodean said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@jc said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial 160+ guests.
I sympathise that she can't have what she wants on her big day but tbf she was taking a risk in her planning by going over the possible limit.
With New Zealand's government, how the fuck could she plan without just trying for one of the biggest days of her life? Not sure why you feel it's ok to victim blame here.
I'm not victim blaming. I said it's shit that her risk didn't pay off.
It would have been great for her if it had.We've been in covid uncertainty for almost two years now
It's not her fault the goverment changes plans with the wind.
That's just silly (in this situation).
The level system was in place for ages and inviting over 100 people could only work out there in level 1 so ANY move in levels would have stuffed plans. Under the traffic lights it was clear that there would be a move to Red under a community breakout so once again 100 would be the limit.
Unless she made her guest list before March 2020 and hasn't re-thought it she has taken a risk on the country remaining in Orange. That's not from random govt changes.Traffic Light System came in December, and got changes just this week. Levels were applied with varying criteria not based on any science (cabinet often ignored advice). Also were applied differently for the same scenerios in different areas of the country.
Impossible to predict and random seems pretty right to me.
-
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@jc said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial 160+ guests.
I sympathise that she can't have what she wants on her big day but tbf she was taking a risk in her planning by going over the possible limit.
It's like people getting stuck overseas when travelling for non essential reasons. The risk was known and well spelled out. The result is shit though.I have a workmate also doing a wedding in a few weeks. It is planned to the Nth degree and she deliberately kept numbers down and let guests know they couldn't attend if un-vaxxed.
She took the approach of wanting certainty and avoiding last minute disappointment and stress.Yep, shit choices to have to make but they are choices.
Heavy on the assumptions aren’t you? Young women plan their weddings for years. When my friend started planning her wedding, way prior to Covid lockdowns being a thing, 160 guests wasn’t controversial. She went ahead with this date based on the mistaken assumption that when the government said vaccination was the way out they wouldn’t keep moving the fucking goalposts.
Everyone on the guest list has done absolutely everything asked of us but the government hasn’t. Clearly they don’t have a plan that captures all the pieces that need to be in place before we can do normal things like having 160 person weddings. You know, like vaccinations reaching a threshold, hospitals having sufficient capacity, MIQ being up to standard, appropriate testing being in place. Instead we’re apparently just supposed to accept that those days are gone. When did that happen?
Frankly it’s hilarious that your expectations are so high of her planning responsibilities when you completely absolve the government from having any need to do the same.
-
@jc said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@jc said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial 160+ guests.
I sympathise that she can't have what she wants on her big day but tbf she was taking a risk in her planning by going over the possible limit.
It's like people getting stuck overseas when travelling for non essential reasons. The risk was known and well spelled out. The result is shit though.I have a workmate also doing a wedding in a few weeks. It is planned to the Nth degree and she deliberately kept numbers down and let guests know they couldn't attend if un-vaxxed.
She took the approach of wanting certainty and avoiding last minute disappointment and stress.Yep, shit choices to have to make but they are choices.
Heavy on the assumptions aren’t you? Young women plan their weddings for years. When my friend started planning her wedding, way prior to Covid lockdowns being a thing, 160 guests wasn’t controversial. She went ahead with this date based on the mistaken assumption that when the government said vaccination was the way out they wouldn’t keep moving the fucking goalposts.
Everyone on the guest list has done absolutely everything asked of us but the government hasn’t. Clearly they don’t have a plan that captures all the pieces that need to be in place before we can do normal things like having 160 person weddings. You know, like vaccinations reaching a threshold, hospitals having sufficient capacity, MIQ being up to standard, appropriate testing being in place. Instead we’re apparently just supposed to accept that those days are gone. When did that happen?
Frankly it’s hilarious that your expectations are so high of her planning responsibilities when you completely absolve the government from having any need to do the same.
Talk about muddying the waters on a simple observation.
Is it really unreasonable to comment that we know we live in an unpredictable crappy situation at the moment and have done for nearly two years. The rules on gatherings under the levels system didn't change and nor have they under the traffic lights. If she continued to plan for 160 on the hope that we would be either level 1, Orange or Green, or have waved Covid goodbye that was a risk she was obviously willing to take.
I gave an example of someone in the same situation who decided not to take the risk and will be going ahead under Red without disappointment.
It was an observation on the personal choice. Not one I would have taken or encouraged someone too.
My son and partner have put theirs on ice until they see a clear path from the govt rather than forge ahead anyway and blame others.
According to this thread it is plainly obvious that the govt can't/won't lay out clear future shifts that they will stick with. Surely you just work with that knowledge rather than against it? -
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@jc said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@jc said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial 160+ guests.
I sympathise that she can't have what she wants on her big day but tbf she was taking a risk in her planning by going over the possible limit.
It's like people getting stuck overseas when travelling for non essential reasons. The risk was known and well spelled out. The result is shit though.I have a workmate also doing a wedding in a few weeks. It is planned to the Nth degree and she deliberately kept numbers down and let guests know they couldn't attend if un-vaxxed.
She took the approach of wanting certainty and avoiding last minute disappointment and stress.Yep, shit choices to have to make but they are choices.
Heavy on the assumptions aren’t you? Young women plan their weddings for years. When my friend started planning her wedding, way prior to Covid lockdowns being a thing, 160 guests wasn’t controversial. She went ahead with this date based on the mistaken assumption that when the government said vaccination was the way out they wouldn’t keep moving the fucking goalposts.
Everyone on the guest list has done absolutely everything asked of us but the government hasn’t. Clearly they don’t have a plan that captures all the pieces that need to be in place before we can do normal things like having 160 person weddings. You know, like vaccinations reaching a threshold, hospitals having sufficient capacity, MIQ being up to standard, appropriate testing being in place. Instead we’re apparently just supposed to accept that those days are gone. When did that happen?
Frankly it’s hilarious that your expectations are so high of her planning responsibilities when you completely absolve the government from having any need to do the same.
Talk about muddying the waters on a simple observation.
Is it really unreasonable to comment that we know we live in an unpredictable crappy situation at the moment and have done for nearly two years. The rules on gatherings under the levels system didn't change and nor have they under the traffic lights. If she continued to plan for 160 on the hope that we would be either level 1, Orange or Green, or have waved Covid goodbye that was a risk she was obviously willing to take.
I gave an example of someone in the same situation who decided not to take the risk and will be going ahead under Red without disappointment.
It was an observation on the personal choice. Not one I would have taken or encouraged someone too.
My son and partner have put theirs on ice until they see a clear path from the govt rather than forge ahead anyway and blame others.
According to this thread it is plainly obvious that the govt can't/won't lay out clear future shifts that they will stick with. Surely you just work with that knowledge rather than against it?Yes, it’s unreasonable. We were having a discussion about how shit it is that people with longstanding plans have had them put in jeopardy with an impending move to Red, especially the embarrassment of having to choose who to cull. Whether or not the alert system or lockdowns or whatever changed, the fact that 160 needs to change to 100 is an embarrassing situation.
You jumped in with “shoulda known better”. Well she didn’t. And she shouldn’t have to be trying to anticipate the motivations of a bunch of incompetents who deploy slogans instead of ability.