[Genuine Realist]

Originally the COVID section was an "Emergency" site apparently.   I suspect that emergency designation may no longer be applicable.

At the time lots of disturbing news about COVID was bubbling up from different places and there were events relevant to this board.   It was very convenient to come to one area and get updates on events directly impacting Stanford.
Social distancing at Stanford venues
Stanford holding remote finals
The Pac-12 holding Pac-12 hoops without fans
NCAA stopping all sports
Stanford announcing a virtual Spring Quarter

All of those rather unprecedented steps directly impacting Stanford student-athletes happened in a span of 2 weeks.  Behind all of them was an emerging pandemic, an emergency.   How that pandemic was handled impacted the outlook for all of those Stanford related items and many other things. 

I had no idea that POTUS45 would work diligently to imply that those that believe in fighting COVID with PPE, testing and tracing would be seen as enemies of POTUS45 himself.  However, as President Trump has laid the groundwork so consistently for 100+ days it now is impossible to talk about COVID mitigation without implying something about POTUS45.  Now in the USA every option or choice on COVID is oddly binary with one position clearly pro-Trump and the other anti-Trump. 

That's too bad, but hard to imagine COVID will become less politicized as we march closer to November.   I would advocate treating COVID as political and banning it.  EXCEPT I really expect that in the next 30 days COVID will directly impact NCAA sports for the 2020-2021 academic year making it more relevant to Stanford Athletics than any other item in slow June-July period.

Tough call

I'd be in favor of banning any mention of Trump or his opposition.

This may not be readily apparent, but my consistent viewpoint is that it is way, way too early to write history about these extraordinary times, which means it is way, way too early to make judgments of any kind. I recognize this leads to some absolut5ion - at this time - which is a result some don't like. But I think it is the practical reality, in a time when hard facts are hard to come by and reporting nearly always distorted by passionate partisanship.

Thus, there was a common assumption that he virus originated from China alone in the early months. It's now apparent that some of the clusters in NYC were of European origin.

The lockdown, which I supported and complied with, may have been massive overkill - or not. Maybe the truth is in between - required for a time, while clinical data was gathered, but extended for too long. Or not. Maybe we should have gone to practical social distancing measures much earlier - or not.

Masks were derided for a time, and now are seen to be the best practical method of preventing spread. How transmissable the virus is on covites is still up in the air. The CDC guidelines at present mention it only as a secondary method and use probablistic language. Who knows?

In terms of blame game, who knew what when is still completely up in the air. (The journalisitic accounts are one and all flawed by agendaism - real journalism has disappeared, I hope temporarily)  - a good reason not to play it. 

I'd like to see the discussion stick to clinical facts and leave invidious judgments to one side.

Reading the Board daily, I am impressed with how lttle

[Genuine Realist]

Originally the COVID section was an "Emergency" site apparently.   I suspect that emergency designation may no longer be applicable.

At the time lots of disturbing news about COVID was bubbling up from different places and there were events relevant to this board.   It was very convenient to come to one area and get updates on events directly impacting Stanford.
Social distancing at Stanford venues
Stanford holding remote finals
The Pac-12 holding Pac-12 hoops without fans
NCAA stopping all sports
Stanford announcing a virtual Spring Quarter

All of those rather unprecedented steps directly impacting Stanford student-athletes happened in a span of 2 weeks.  Behind all of them was an emerging pandemic, an emergency.   How that pandemic was handled impacted the outlook for all of those Stanford related items and many other things. 

I had no idea that POTUS45 would work diligently to imply that those that believe in fighting COVID with PPE, testing and tracing would be seen as enemies of POTUS45 himself.  However, as President Trump has laid the groundwork so consistently for 100+ days it now is impossible to talk about COVID mitigation without implying something about POTUS45.  Now in the USA every option or choice on COVID is oddly binary with one position clearly pro-Trump and the other anti-Trump. 

That's too bad, but hard to imagine COVID will become less politicized as we march closer to November.   I would advocate treating COVID as political and banning it.  EXCEPT I really expect that in the next 30 days COVID will directly impact NCAA sports for the 2020-2021 academic year making it more relevant to Stanford Athletics than any other item in slow June-July period.

Tough call

I'd be in favor of banning any mention of Trump or his opposition.

This may not be readily apparent, but my consistent viewpoint is that it is way, way too early to write history about these extraordinary times, which means it is way, way too early to make judgments of any kind. I recognize this leads to some absolut5ion - at this time - which is a result some don't like. But I think it is the practical reality, in a time when hard facts are hard to come by and reporting nearly always distorted by passionate partisanship.

Thus, there was a common assumption that he virus originated from China alone in the early months. It's now apparent that some of the clusters in NYC were of European origin.

The lockdown, which I supported and complied with, may have been massive overkill - or not. Maybe the truth is in between - required for a time, while clinical data was gathered, but extended for too long. Or not. Maybe we should have gone to practical social distancing measures much earlier - or not.

Masks were derided for a time, and now are seen to be the best practical method of preventing spread. How transmissable the virus is on covites is still up in the air. The CDC guidelines at present mention it only as a secondary method and use probablistic language. Who knows?

In terms of blame game, who knew what when is still completely up in the air. (The journalisitic accounts are one and all flawed by agendaism - real journalism has disappeared, I hope temporarily)  - a good reason not to play it. 

I'd like to see the discussion stick to clinical facts and leave invidious judgments to one side.

Reading the Board daily, I am impressed with how lttle