Jump to content
 

Please use M,M&M only for topics that do not fit within other forum areas. All topics posted here await admin team approval to ensure they don't belong elsewhere.

The return of exhibitions - a further poll


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold
On 02/07/2021 at 09:46, Les1952 said:

 

The one-way system we have devised for South Notts works as follows.

 

After entering everyone turns right into the main hall.  (the turn to the left is closed so that coridoor can be used by people returning from upstairs)

 

Flow round the outside of the main hall will be clockwise but there is also a centre aisle which shortens the route if repeating.  This also allows us to separate the food queue from the browsing punters.

 

The stage will have an "up" stairway and a "down" stairway with one direction of travel across it.  the main flow in front of the stage will be in the opposite direction to the flow on the stage.

The balcony will be reached UP the stairs in the main hall (that we normally don't use as I'm not happy with people going down them- they are a bit steep.  There is a level change ion the balcony in any case so travel will be away from the stairs along the lower level and back along the higher.  Return from the balcony will be by the main stairs back to the entrance.

Exit from the show will be via the fire exit at the far end of the stage.

 

This makes the one-way system a series of loops which punters can go round in (almost) any order and as many times as they like.  It just makes it a lot less likely that people will bump into someone going the opposite way.

 

Hopefully the schematic will give the idea.

 

1942159849_SouthNottsschematic.jpg.428402f91b07b25a6299c25ba3d049d3.jpg

 

There is a wooden partition between the food queue and the exhibits under the balcony as you head towards the kitchen.  

 

Hope this helps how a one-way system can work.

 

Les

 

As an afterthought we generated a QR code for the clubroom so will generate another for the show and display it (in mulpiple for ease) at the entrance, with a request for folks with the app top please zap it.

A couple of questions with your proposed set up.

A one way system and maintaining social distancing around the exhibition looks good on paper, but will it result in a time limit on how long each visitor can spend at each layout or trader before they are required to move on to allow other visitors the chance to view. Eg a 4m long layout with a 1m social distance maintained for each visitor can then only accommodate 3 visitors along the side and 2 at each end. Are you then anticipating a queuing system on the more popular attractions? As there is a set limit on the numbers inside the venue, will there be a time limit set on each visitor, how long they can actually spend inside the venue before they are asked politely to leave to make way for other visitors?

What impact do you envisage once the numbers inside have been reached, it will be a one out, one in, system of entry. How many casual visitors (families with children) will just walk away as the waiting queue is too long, especially if it`s raining, resulting in a potential loss of income.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I think most people look at Masks as being a way of stopping an infected person from spreading disease. Rather than wearing one to stop catching it . I’m wondering if maybe this should change now . Maybe we could wear masks of the correct grade (is it an FP3) like they use in hospitals, out of choice, so that we can visit exhibitions , trade fairs etc . It would be up to us to provide own protection , if you want to go without a mask up to you.  Of course we still need to know the science , this assumes these masks are successful in preventing infection from the Delta variant . But if it turns out they do reduce risk of infection I’d be willing to wear one to attend exhibition . 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 03/07/2021 at 11:18, Free At Last said:

After having had a camera up my nose and feeling it was still there over a week later I have put a ban on anything entering my nasal passage.

Just had to check twice for spelling of nasal!

 

(Gor the readers with out funny bone! Thought it was other orifice...think I need to get out more)

  • Like 1
  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 02/07/2021 at 09:46, Les1952 said:

 

The one-way system we have devised for South Notts works as follows.

 

After entering everyone turns right into the main hall.  (the turn to the left is closed so that coridoor can be used by people returning from upstairs)

 

Flow round the outside of the main hall will be clockwise but there is also a centre aisle which shortens the route if repeating.  This also allows us to separate the food queue from the browsing punters.

 

The stage will have an "up" stairway and a "down" stairway with one direction of travel across it.  the main flow in front of the stage will be in the opposite direction to the flow on the stage.

The balcony will be reached UP the stairs in the main hall (that we normally don't use as I'm not happy with people going down them- they are a bit steep.  There is a level change ion the balcony in any case so travel will be away from the stairs along the lower level and back along the higher.  Return from the balcony will be by the main stairs back to the entrance.

Exit from the show will be via the fire exit at the far end of the stage.

 

This makes the one-way system a series of loops which punters can go round in (almost) any order and as many times as they like.  It just makes it a lot less likely that people will bump into someone going the opposite way.

 

Hopefully the schematic will give the idea.

 

1942159849_SouthNottsschematic.jpg.428402f91b07b25a6299c25ba3d049d3.jpg

 

There is a wooden partition between the food queue and the exhibits under the balcony as you head towards the kitchen.  

 

Hope this helps how a one-way system can work.

 

Les

 

As an afterthought we generated a QR code for the clubroom so will generate another for the show and display it (in mulpiple for ease) at the entrance, with a request for folks with the app top please zap it.

Bloody hell you didn't have a job designing tescos one way system last year? if you forgot your baked beans around again you went! Go against the flow and you just become a leper! 

 

What if you need a pee could be a long walk..

Ps good luck with your show....hope it works out for your club

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
17 minutes ago, griffgriff said:

I’m a little concerned that 30% observe no restrictions. Why would I want to attend a show where nearly 1 and 3 put themselves at risk?

 

Griff

 

If it was just themselves that they put at risk it wouldn't bother me. It is when they increase the risk to me that it becomes a concern.

 

I had my first post lockdown trip to a town centre including a meal at a pub yesterday. The number of people in shops with no masks, or with masks under their chins, not using hand sanitizers and not socially distancing was astonishing. I felt very uncomfortable and it isn't something I want to repeat in a hurry.

  • Like 4
  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
4 hours ago, Les1952 said:

Our MP "Honest Bob" Jenrick has been doing the rounds this morning saying that masks, QR codes and other restrictions are to become optional or be abolished from July 19th

There is a lead article in today's Sunday Times stating as much and that the government has signed off on these changes.

 

Even having it from that normally-respected source I'll believe it fully when Uncle Boris tells us and not before although it is being touted more widely now that remaining "restrictions" will become "advice for personal judgement".  Some restrictions have only ever been advice or guidance but have been wrapped in language suggesting they are mandatory.  Social distancing is one of those.  A good idea in the circumstances but in any event unworkable in at least some situations when you have 68 million people out and about.  

 

In terms of shows and other similar events I would anticipate the smaller ones might be first off the mark simply because they are easier to manage if there are any numbers still to control and their cost-base tends to be much smaller meaning they can cope with a reduced attendance better than the huge commercial events.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, griffgriff said:

I’m a little concerned that 30% observe no restrictions. Why would I want to attend a show where nearly 1 and 3 put themselves at risk?

 

Griff

 

13 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

I had my first post lockdown trip to a town centre including a meal at a pub yesterday. The number of people in shops with no masks, or with masks under their chins, not using hand sanitizers and not socially distancing was astonishing. I felt very uncomfortable and it isn't something I want to repeat in a hurry.

This personal perception of risk varies, and is distinct from actual risk. I use my mask as directed, am double jabbed etc, and am personally comfortable when out and about. When I am alongside someone not wearing a mask, I am aware that they may well be flouting a regulation (they may, of course, be exempt); but I do not feel personally threatened because the data and information suggests the risk is proportionate to all the other risks I took when I went out (being run over, mugged, assaulted or whatever).

 

Of course anyone organising an exhibition needs the required number of visitors so this level of willingness to attend is an important factor. Pre-Covid there were a lot of exhibitions so I would hope that with reduced events later this year they will be well patronised even if for understandable personal reasons a number of people may stay away.

Edited by andyman7
Spelling
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, griffgriff said:

I’m a little concerned that 30% observe no restrictions. Why would I want to attend a show where nearly 1 and 3 put themselves at risk?

 

Griff

 

 

I took that question to mean within the current guidelines and law. Don't forget many of us still have to live normal lives.

 

The other answers don't apply to me as I'm certainly not a cautious person doing less things, nor am I only doing emergency/essential activities.

 

I'm afraid I think you are reading the answer wrong.

 

 

Jason

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, griffgriff said:

I’m a little concerned that 30% observe no restrictions. Why would I want to attend a show where nearly 1 and 3 put themselves at risk?

 

Griff


But it says ‘observe no restrictions on my activities’. Which presumably means that while they go out and about and do activities they still follow the ‘hands, face, space’ rule.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
39 minutes ago, Liam said:


But it says ‘observe no restrictions on my activities’. Which presumably means that while they go out and about and do activities they still follow the ‘hands, face, space’ rule.

Then that’ would be observing restrictions would it not?

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
50 minutes ago, andyman7 said:

 

This personal perception of risk varies, and is distinct from actual risk. I use my mask as directed, am double jabbed etc, and am personally comfortable when out and about. When I am alongside someone not wearing a mask, I am aware that they may well be flouting a regulation (they may, of course, be exempt); but I do not feel personally threatened because the data and information suggests the risk is proportionate to all the other risks I took when I went out (being run over, mugged, assaulted or whatever).

 

Of course anyone organising an exhibition needs the required number of visitors so this level of willingness to attend is an important factor. Pre-Covid there were a lot of exhibitions so I would hope that with reduced events later this year they will be well patronised even if for understandable personal reasons a number of people may stay away.

 

You are quite right. We do all have different perceptions of risk. I don't see driving being any other than an acceptable level, likewise walking down the street. Being in a big room full of hundreds of people I don't know who may or may not be following sensible precautions is another matter.

 

My personal experience, including several people I know who have had Covid and been from slightly to very ill, one with dreadful "long Covid" plus one who has sadly died from it, tends to have set my views on "proportional" to the "err on the side of safety" end of the spectrum.

  • Like 2
  • Friendly/supportive 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
50 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

 

I took that question to mean within the current guidelines and law. Don't forget many of us still have to live normal lives.

 

The other answers don't apply to me as I'm certainly not a cautious person doing less things, nor am I only doing emergency/essential activities.

 

I'm afraid I think you are reading the answer wrong.

 

 

Jason

Yep…. What’s a normal life? I’m afraid I’ve forgotten.

 

Griff

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

just completed questionaire. I think it possibly slants too far towards the cautious.

When considering the future you have to balance positive and negative consequences, In medical research theysay that the benefits of any treatment have to outweight the downsides(my father used to work in Cancer research and always sad yo could essily kill a cancer, but in most cases that would also kill the patient, so most of the research was on how to not kill the patient). With this pandemic, there have been far too many downsides, such as the mental effect on some people. In the future we will have to balance downsides such as that against the possible medical effects of returning to normality.

I am a mathematician by training and have a certain undersyanding about systems, and how statisticas can be misused. The way numbers have been pumped out over past year personally offends me from a mathematicians perspective, and as a result I don't trust most of the statistics. To put it bluntly if someone presented a scientific paper with this type of evidence, I would throw it in the bin straight away.

I am in my 60s, have had both jabs, and did have a dose of C19 back in November 2019, before it was officially recognised here, I know because my wife had the classic loss of taste and smell symptoms. I mentioned this to my brother who has only just retired as a GP, and he was pretty certain it was C19. I also know what it is like to lose a member of my family, having lost my oldest child to cancer a few years ago, far more painfull than when my parents died.

 

I said the questionaire slants towards the cautious. For me any exhibitions which put in any of the restrictions suggested would not get me visiting.

  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, griffgriff said:

Then that’ would be observing restrictions would it not?


As Jason said, within the current guidelines. It is important to note the difference between a restriction and a precaution. A restriction would prevent you from doing something, so the lockdown restricted you from going to the pub, whereas a precaution allows you to do something but in a certain way, so now you are allowed to go to the pub but when you’re there you’re told to wear a face mask unless seated and not gather in groups of more than six people. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I have just done the questionnaire. I seemed to be in or near the majority responses for all the questions except the one on regulations. Where I am in the 11% ticking the box for 'none'.

 

I go to shows to stand with complete strangers to look at models, to interact socially with people I have met before and other strangers, and to crawl on the floor to rummage through boxes already sifted through before me. If you take any of these things away, or impose fresh restrictions like a time limit at a layout or not being able to touch stock, I won't go.

 

- Richard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
45 minutes ago, Liam said:


As Jason said, within the current guidelines. It is important to note the difference between a restriction and a precaution. A restriction would prevent you from doing something, so the lockdown restricted you from going to the pub, whereas a precaution allows you to do something but in a certain way, so now you are allowed to go to the pub but when you’re there you’re told to wear a face mask unless seated and not gather in groups of more than six people. 

I fear, regulations and precautions are equally hopeless because people do "unregulated" things which are equally stupid.

 

I work in a charity shop. Last Wednesday, a customer asked for the tray of rings. She proceeded to put the entire length of her middle finger into her mouth (she is "mask exempt") and use her spit as a lubricant to try on some different rings. Now - I think this is horrible, but having some a kind of a rule about it is equally stupid. Some kind of  sense of decency and caution would be far better.

 

She did at least accept my offer of a blob of hand sanitiser afterwards. I scrubbed up, soapy water half way up my arms.

 

- Richard.

  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I might be making myself unpopular here but as a nation we have to stop being frightened half to death, get a sense of proportion and get on with our lives.

 

We are only aware of the spread of Covid because of the daily government announcements but we have to compare them with other risks.  The daily cases may now be in the high 20,000s once again but not the hospitalisations and deaths.  The daily Covid death toll is not unlike that caused by road accidents as are the number of hospital admissions.  Some may argue about "long Covid" but don't forget that many of those admitted to hospital as a result of a road accident will suffer life-changing injuries far worse than long Covid can inflict.  How many daily new cases of flu are there typically?

 

To those who seem wary of ever attending a show or other venue attracting a large crowd I ask are you happy to travel in a road vehicle or even be a pedestrian?  You are just as likely to fall victim to injury or death on the road as you are catching Covid now.  And, if you are not willing to have the vaccine (unless on medical grounds) then so be it but don't expect the NHS to come to your rescue - and that is also the view of my GP neighbour!

  • Like 6
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Free At Last said:

Well then, there we have it, you can't argue against that.

No waiting in a phone que for you to speak to doctors surgery for you.....(not to mention 5 mins of covid advice I didn't want half a dozen web sights to check....I pity the elderly who NEED to speak to quack ASAP....who then hang up in confusion)..

Maybe one day in the future we will know how much propergander has cost! Seen a full wrap of a 40t lorry trailer on m6 the other day ...hands face space!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

To repeat/expand something I said back up thread: we really are very short of meaningful, and trustworthy, information with which to calibrate our caution.

 

We could all make use of some real information showing, probably by age bands, the effects of Covid if single and double-jabbed, ideally in combination with common chronic conditions like diabetes, obesity etc.

 

And, we could do with some well-founded “probability of catching it” calculations.

 

Then we might actually, properly, be able to compare it with other common risks (disease and accident), in a way that is very challenging to do now.

 

Personally, I’m not interested in bromide assurances, or over-hyped headlines in one direction or the other, and I find the PM’s statements about the situation being “NHS-safe” singularly useless for making personal risk decisions - let’s have some good quality numbers, and good quality comparators.

 

Personal risk appetite varies, but without solid figures all of us, from the insanely timid to the insanely brave, are just guessing.

  • Agree 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
39 minutes ago, Mike_Walker said:

You are just as likely to fall victim to injury or death on the road as you are catching Covid now. 

May we have a source and some stats please for this comparison?

I can give the Covid figures:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/2july2021

This is the current (July)  ONS figure for England

In England, the percentage of people testing positive for coronavirus (COVID-19) continued to increase in the week ending 26 June 2021; we estimate that 211,100 people within the community population in England had COVID-19 (95% credible interval: 185,200 to 239,300), equating to around 1 in 260 people.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I strongly suspect that Mike’s assertion is nonsense,  by a factor of about 360.

 

At the moment c25 000 people in the U.K. are testing positive for Covid each day (“catching Covid now”).

 

That is very close indeed to the number of people who are killed or seriously injured on the roads in the U.K. in a year
 

Or did Mike mean that death or serious illness from Covid is less likely than death or serious injury from road accidents?

 

That might be true with the degree of vaccination now achieved. Do Covid deaths and hospitalisation now sum to less than c70/day now?

 

EDIT: No they don’t. The latest reported daily sum of Covid deaths and hospital admissions is 15 + 358 = 373, so Mike is out by a factor of about 5. 
 

It would appear that one is currently roughly five times more likely to suffer death or serious illness from Covid than from a road accident. And that multiplier is presently climbing by the day.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Nearholmer
  • Like 1
  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
8 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

To repeat/expand something I said back up thread: we really are very short of meaningful, and trustworthy, information with which to calibrate our caution.

 

I think we "know" from the statistics we have, the rate of infection is climbing but the mortality rate is dropping. And we can reasonably suppose, this effect is because the vaccines work.

 

Most of the people I see at shows are in demographic groups which welcome the vaccines. They get their vaccinations done. Looking at ages, most of them have been double-jabbed by now.

 

I reckon, this is as good as it is going to get. The virus is shifting from being a pandemic to being endemic. The onus shifts to the individual to get jabbed and, if they have symptoms, self-isolate. We will have to wait years maybe decades for the virus to mutate into something less harmful. I am happy to go to shows as soon as they restart without rules and regulations, and this ought to be "now"

 

- Richard.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...