While supportive of any compromises, trade-offs and nuances that encourage people in making them willing to play OTB at the current time, I hope such an arrangement is not seen as the basis for the long-term.Matt Bridgeman wrote: ↑Sat Aug 07, 2021 6:54 pmThe 10-12th September 4NCL Congress at Leamington Spa is likely retaining the half point bye choice for the players facing non-mask players. It does seem like a smart idea, especially if we don't really know how much of a winter Covid rise we're all heading into.
1. Allowing players to have a half point bye because they object to the opponent's clothing is a dangerous precedent. If the clothing is so objectionable, the organisers can impose a default, but allowing a discretionary veto is a dangerous precedent (it is perhaps worth noting that e.g. Iranian players playing a game against Israelis undergo personal risks far higher than someone facing a maskless opponent. There is no support for the idea that such Iranians should be able to take a discretionary 1/2-point bye when such pairings occurs).
2. The substantive protection against Covid is from vaccination not masks, especially if these are cloth masks or loosely worn surgical masks. I find it hard to see a scientific reason why sitting for 4 hours opposite someone wearing a home-made cloth mask would be acceptable, but not without a mask. And if someone feels very strongly about the risk of playing an unmasked opponent, I hope that they themselves are wearing an N95 mask...
3. Some of the demands for either legally or socially obligatory mask-wearing into the far future have the whiff of authoritarianism about them, and in my view the sooner this is removed from the body politic the better.
(I should also say that I am supportive of anyone wanting to organise events for those only happy to play double-jabbed masked opponents - but on the long-term basis I don't think players should have a discretionary right to object to a pairing if their opponent is satisfying the tournament conditions)