That is your interpretation of the definition. Warfarin may be "essential" to a cardiac patient but it is not for heart healthy people. What is essential for one is not for others. There are degrees, it isn't black and white.
I'll grant you that there are shades of grey in which socio-political levers are pulled to navigate this, but there is an aspect of the current crisis that is black and white and that is the contagiousness of the virus. When I said earlier that there is a risk to be assessed when determining which businesses are worth keeping open at this time, the risk is whether or not the products and services offered are worth the number of potential infections that could come from activity at that site. And that risk isn't just personal, it's communal. We're all links in a chain of potential transmissions and considerations of acceptable risk must be evaluated on those grounds. It's the heavy wind under which the trees must bend or be broken.
So let's not muddy the waters of how we're framing the conversation of LGSes being essential or not. Issues of revenue, income, comfort, mental health, etc all matter, but they are the secondary concern here from a social perspective of navigating this crisis with the least number infected or dead. Which obviously isn't the priority for some, and is a big red flag about their access to power, if you ask me.
All of this is relevant as well, how "emotional" to dispel my questions as if they have no validity. If a person and their families welfare relies on a job it is ESSENTIAL that they perform that job so that they may provide (income) what is truly needed for themselves and their family.
No, the job is not essential, the income is.
Who are we to decide their job as non "essential"? Decisions have been and continue to be made on people's lives wholly without their consent.
And? Doctors restrain patients all the time when they're in crisis and a danger to themselves and others.
Again, we're all links in a chain of potential transmissions of a deadly virus. We are dangers to ourselves and others if we aren't behaving in ways that reduces the spread of the virus. Luckily, most people evidently (given polling around fears of ending lockdowns too soon) support lockdown measures which has saved countless lives.
Selling Magic cards may very well be essential to a lot of people out there, just like selling liquor or pot or dog grooming services. Don't marginalize or ignore their plight in this. They are also victims, albeit to an arguable lesser degree.
No one has been marginalizing or ignoring the financial concerns of many, on the contrary. Those financial concerns just shouldn't be dictating public health directives. An LGS owner needing income is no reason to put that person, every in-person customer, and all the consequential links in the chain at risk. That doesn't mean that business owner shouldn't have income or that small businesses shouldn't be supported to ensure they survive this, but it's just by no reasonable definition worth the risk to life to open that business. Simply saying "but these people need their jobs and that makes them essential" is unconvincing, and dilutes the importance of staying clear-headed about what essential means in the context of a deadly pandemic.
By whose definition? Don't fall for what is being sold to the public right now. Who gets to make these decisions and WHY?
1) By what reasonable definition do gaming stores qualify as essential during a global pandemic?
2) Who? Governments under the guidance of medical experts.
3) Why? Because that's what they're there for. Unless your WHY was meant as "Why are some things deemed essential and other things not?", in which case, because every business/service carries a risk of transmission of a deadly pathogen and businesses/services that offer the basics for survival and/or harm reduction can be considered essential. It's about acceptable risk and balancing those risks with the basic survival needs of a populace.
So what you're also saying is that it isn't essential for people to have gaming hobbies outside their homes in the context of a global pandemic?
What I'm saying is that any business or service that features in-person activities is a potential vector for transmission of a highly contagious virus and needs to be assessed as such. A business or service that has been deemed essential has been so because officials have calculated as an acceptable risk. Acceptable risks for things that provide the basics for life (groceries, pharmacies, etc) make sense to me because we need to be able to provide the basics for life to people.
So what I'm saying is that I understand how hobbies can positively influence one's mental health (one of the programs my staff run is based on it, in fact) and I understand why small businesses are important for many people's livelihoods, and I do not believe either truth qualifies gaming stores as essential services the way I understand the term in the context we're in. For a business to be essential, it should be providing the basic needs for survival and/or provide harm reduction.
This kinda reminds me of the argument about why people shouldn't treat YouTube as their primary source of income when they should've gotten a real job elsewhere. People are always going to try to pursue something they enjoy that allows them to escape from real world problems however we're in a situation right now where they can't hide from the drama any longer.
I appreciate that, we all need that break from a very grim reality, I just don't see how that desire for escape is essential. At least insofar as the businesses that enable that escape would be considered essential. People can find the escape they seek without putting the population at increased risk, bottom line.
Hahahaha, no they aren't. Which isn't to say those businesses aren't important to those financially or socially supported by them, they just aren't essential in the context of a global pandemic.
Who gets to define "essential"?
That would be the government, under the advisement of health experts. In times of emergency (and a deadly global pandemic qualifies), it's our elected officials who should be making decisions to create a pathway through the emergency that ensures the survival of most people, including a plan to handle the consequences of whatever actions need to be taken.
I see a lot of liquor stores, pot stores, lotto/gambling available at this time. How are they "essential" at all? You know the answer. Taxes and Special Interests.
I don't disagree when it comes to some businesses that get deemed essential, but when it comes to pot and booze the answer is actually practical. Access to pot/booze prevents avoidable hospital visits from alcoholism withdrawal symptoms and people who use marijuana for medical purposes. Concerns were raised about burdening the healthcare system at a time when some centres could be overrun by covid patients. Though I have no doubt that those stores are seen as harm reduction in other ways, particularly in regards to calming an anxious population, plus of course revenue.
But if the problem is a perceived double standard, the solution still isn't opening up other stores. You can't squint at gaming stores until they look essential, and gathering for in person gaming is still a substantial risk of infection.
Government does need to "protect and serve" the people. But they need to do it the least obtrusive fashion that provides that help.
Sure. Though I don't think the current social distancing measures are more obtrusive than necessary, I'm of the opinion that a lot of nations have been half assing their response and could be much more purposefully aggressive.
So he admits that the game is still largely played offline, often at an LGS, but how are players going to do that in the next many months (potentially year or more)? In person play is not happening at LGSes, if they're even open, and I highly doubt the average playgroup is getting together for game night. Is MaRo expecting a dramatic spike of people playing paper Magic via Zoom?
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad the company is at least signalling a continued commitment to paper Magic, I just don't see it as anything other than a platitude given that in person play is largely impossible right now and LGSes are going to start dying soon, if they haven't already.
That's because LGSs are treated as non-essential businesses by the government and health officials when they don't understand that EVERY business is essential.
Hahahaha, no they aren't. Which isn't to say those businesses aren't important to those financially or socially supported by them, they just aren't essential in the context of a global pandemic.
They're the ones who are deciding on which businesses survive and which ones go out of business without the consent of the customer who should have the final say on the matter. The customer is the one who is keeping certain businesses alive so why should the government and health officials be the ones to decide for them? That's basically someone telling you how to spend your own money when customers should have a choice of who they want to support.
Yes, the job of the government (among other things) is to keep people safe. The Market is not a reliable advisor during a health crisis when compared to the people who should be determining health policy.
Should governments be doing their best to ensure small businesses survive? Absolutely, and most governments could be doing much more (if they weren't so busy ensuring the ultra wealthy and their corporations were taken care of first). That doesn't mean that customers should be the ones deciding anything right now, because those old consumption patterns are exactly the transmission vectors covid can seize upon. And that is far more important than your desire for customers to save businesses they like.
I think there were actually a lot of noteworthy tidbits. One of the most important being that they are aware that some might being feeling anxious about the company's commitment towards paper, face-to-face Magic and that the crisis and Wizards' response to it may reflect a 'hollowing' out of the offline community. MaRo effectly said that while digital MtG is becoming increasingly popular, it still doesn't represent the majority method by which the game is enjoyed by most players and that they remain dedicated to supporting a game that is largely played offline, often in a local gamestore environment.
So he admits that the game is still largely played offline, often at an LGS, but how are players going to do that in the next many months (potentially year or more)? In person play is not happening at LGSes, if they're even open, and I highly doubt the average playgroup is getting together for game night. Is MaRo expecting a dramatic spike of people playing paper Magic via Zoom?
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad the company is at least signalling a continued commitment to paper Magic, I just don't see it as anything other than a platitude given that in person play is largely impossible right now and LGSes are going to start dying soon, if they haven't already.
I'll grant you that there are shades of grey in which socio-political levers are pulled to navigate this, but there is an aspect of the current crisis that is black and white and that is the contagiousness of the virus. When I said earlier that there is a risk to be assessed when determining which businesses are worth keeping open at this time, the risk is whether or not the products and services offered are worth the number of potential infections that could come from activity at that site. And that risk isn't just personal, it's communal. We're all links in a chain of potential transmissions and considerations of acceptable risk must be evaluated on those grounds. It's the heavy wind under which the trees must bend or be broken.
So let's not muddy the waters of how we're framing the conversation of LGSes being essential or not. Issues of revenue, income, comfort, mental health, etc all matter, but they are the secondary concern here from a social perspective of navigating this crisis with the least number infected or dead. Which obviously isn't the priority for some, and is a big red flag about their access to power, if you ask me.
No, the job is not essential, the income is.
And? Doctors restrain patients all the time when they're in crisis and a danger to themselves and others.
Again, we're all links in a chain of potential transmissions of a deadly virus. We are dangers to ourselves and others if we aren't behaving in ways that reduces the spread of the virus. Luckily, most people evidently (given polling around fears of ending lockdowns too soon) support lockdown measures which has saved countless lives.
No one has been marginalizing or ignoring the financial concerns of many, on the contrary. Those financial concerns just shouldn't be dictating public health directives. An LGS owner needing income is no reason to put that person, every in-person customer, and all the consequential links in the chain at risk. That doesn't mean that business owner shouldn't have income or that small businesses shouldn't be supported to ensure they survive this, but it's just by no reasonable definition worth the risk to life to open that business. Simply saying "but these people need their jobs and that makes them essential" is unconvincing, and dilutes the importance of staying clear-headed about what essential means in the context of a deadly pandemic.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
1) By what reasonable definition do gaming stores qualify as essential during a global pandemic?
2) Who? Governments under the guidance of medical experts.
3) Why? Because that's what they're there for. Unless your WHY was meant as "Why are some things deemed essential and other things not?", in which case, because every business/service carries a risk of transmission of a deadly pathogen and businesses/services that offer the basics for survival and/or harm reduction can be considered essential. It's about acceptable risk and balancing those risks with the basic survival needs of a populace.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
What I'm saying is that any business or service that features in-person activities is a potential vector for transmission of a highly contagious virus and needs to be assessed as such. A business or service that has been deemed essential has been so because officials have calculated as an acceptable risk. Acceptable risks for things that provide the basics for life (groceries, pharmacies, etc) make sense to me because we need to be able to provide the basics for life to people.
So what I'm saying is that I understand how hobbies can positively influence one's mental health (one of the programs my staff run is based on it, in fact) and I understand why small businesses are important for many people's livelihoods, and I do not believe either truth qualifies gaming stores as essential services the way I understand the term in the context we're in. For a business to be essential, it should be providing the basic needs for survival and/or provide harm reduction.
I appreciate that, we all need that break from a very grim reality, I just don't see how that desire for escape is essential. At least insofar as the businesses that enable that escape would be considered essential. People can find the escape they seek without putting the population at increased risk, bottom line.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
That would be the government, under the advisement of health experts. In times of emergency (and a deadly global pandemic qualifies), it's our elected officials who should be making decisions to create a pathway through the emergency that ensures the survival of most people, including a plan to handle the consequences of whatever actions need to be taken.
I don't disagree when it comes to some businesses that get deemed essential, but when it comes to pot and booze the answer is actually practical. Access to pot/booze prevents avoidable hospital visits from alcoholism withdrawal symptoms and people who use marijuana for medical purposes. Concerns were raised about burdening the healthcare system at a time when some centres could be overrun by covid patients. Though I have no doubt that those stores are seen as harm reduction in other ways, particularly in regards to calming an anxious population, plus of course revenue.
But if the problem is a perceived double standard, the solution still isn't opening up other stores. You can't squint at gaming stores until they look essential, and gathering for in person gaming is still a substantial risk of infection.
Sure. Though I don't think the current social distancing measures are more obtrusive than necessary, I'm of the opinion that a lot of nations have been half assing their response and could be much more purposefully aggressive.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
Hahahaha, no they aren't. Which isn't to say those businesses aren't important to those financially or socially supported by them, they just aren't essential in the context of a global pandemic.
Yes, the job of the government (among other things) is to keep people safe. The Market is not a reliable advisor during a health crisis when compared to the people who should be determining health policy.
Should governments be doing their best to ensure small businesses survive? Absolutely, and most governments could be doing much more (if they weren't so busy ensuring the ultra wealthy and their corporations were taken care of first). That doesn't mean that customers should be the ones deciding anything right now, because those old consumption patterns are exactly the transmission vectors covid can seize upon. And that is far more important than your desire for customers to save businesses they like.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
So he admits that the game is still largely played offline, often at an LGS, but how are players going to do that in the next many months (potentially year or more)? In person play is not happening at LGSes, if they're even open, and I highly doubt the average playgroup is getting together for game night. Is MaRo expecting a dramatic spike of people playing paper Magic via Zoom?
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad the company is at least signalling a continued commitment to paper Magic, I just don't see it as anything other than a platitude given that in person play is largely impossible right now and LGSes are going to start dying soon, if they haven't already.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains