Sven Slootweg (soft-deprecated) @joepie91@pixie.town

@psy Yeah, you're pretty much proving my point here. And as I've already told you, I'm done with this topic. I've exhaustively explained my reasons and given concrete criticisms. If you keep going, then the next step is a block.

And if you don't have an answer to "how will the supply chain have been improved if my company folds tomorrow", then you're not rescuing the supply chain at all, you're just running a business

Like, all the systemic industry-wide security issues weren't solved with More Capitalism the last 3 times people tried that either, and in the end it was always some frustrated unpaid random creature with an angry blog post who did the actual work, if it was ever solved at all

Not so excited about the sudden explosion of "supply chain security startups" whose sales pitch seems to basically be that we can solve systemic problems with FOSS dependency security and funding by just Buying Their Specific Magical Product, rather than a commons-based solution.

@dreiwert@chaos.social I have repeatedly complained over the years about the exclusionary characteristics of the ticketing process (not just in terms of scarcity), but at least an attempt was made there to find a workable solution, in the form of a replicating-voucher system.

That is not remotely comparable to "Congress without any attempt at safety precautions whatsoever". And this was never meant to guilt-trip attendees to begin with; it was meant to warn them about the very real dangers, and pressure the orga.

And no, I didn't "win". As I've stated further down the thread, I would have much rather seen an attempt to make it continue with the appropriate safety measures. This is barely a "win" in the sense that at least it's not going to be a superspreader event.

It's also extremely telling how many people seem to be much angrier about me causing a stink, than about the prospect of vulnerable/disabled folks being excluded.

@KAOS@dragonscave.space Also more generally, communication from orga was really lacking here IMO:
- When could we expect a decision?
- How are vulnerable people included in the decisionmaking around COVID safety?
- Will the decision even be public *before* ticket sales start, so that those who need to be more careful don't miss out on a (scarce) ticket?

None of those questions seemed to be answered, and that led to a situation where everybody is in the dark, and so when evidence appears that safety measures are not being considered, then that pretty much leaves this sort of thread as the only remaining option to try and ensure sufficient safety... especially considering how vulnerable folks have been passed by in so many other situations already

Also, something I want to clarify: my criticism isn't and never was towards those in orga who were trying to keep the event safe for everybody. I recognize that some of those involved in the orga will have tried their best. My criticisms were specifically about those who didn't.

@KAOS@dragonscave.space As far as I could tell, it was widely believed in all sorts of hacker circles that Congress *would* take place by default, and that a cancellation would be an anomaly rather than a 50/50 chance. And this is also what the orga communication implied: https://www.ccc.de/en/updates/2022/37-chaos-communication-congress-in-hamburg

Update: it's just been announced that (centralized) Congress will be cancelled this year: https://ccc.de/en/updates/2022/no-congress-2022

Mixed feelings; I would have liked to see it continue with safety measures, but this is certainly better than continuing it with *no* measures.

The alternative suggested in the post (smaller local events) is probably a good one; the overall risk should be much lower there. I'm also more optimistic about Camp; with it being outdoors (= lots of natural ventilation), it would be much easier to limit the spread.