[Badge Submission] SeaGL 2023

[joshsimmons]

Event Name: SeaGL Link to the Event Website: https://seagl.org Point of Contact: Wm Salt Hale @altsalt

Signing the Pledge: Yes Links to Key Pages: https://seagl.org/health_and_safety_policy

Masking:

"We encourage attendees to wear facial coverings recommended by the United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in all indoor spaces, any spaces where physical distancing cannot be maintained, and any other spaces designated by the conference organizers.

We require attendees, aside from the active presenter, to wear facial coverings recommended by the United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in all presentation spaces, including the keynote auditorium.

We encourage the use of masks with an N95 or similar rating. These are particularly effective at reducing exposure to viruses, allergens, and other pollutants that may cause COVID/flu-like symptoms.

We commit to having a supply of high-quality facial coverings at the event and will supply any attendee who needs one, free of charge.

We commit to providing outdoor space for attendees who wish to eat, drink, or socialize without wearing a facial covering.

The first two (2) violations of this masking policy by a participant will result in verbal or written warnings. A third (3rd) violation will result in removal from the conference with no recourse.

Note that there are spaces on our venue’s premises which are not subject to our policy."

Vaccines:

"We expect all non-exempt attendees to have received a complete primary series of COVID-19 vaccinations.

We encourage attendees to receive up-to-date COVID-19 and influenza vaccine boosters.

We will not require vaccination status verification due to SeaGL's commitment to attendance without identification or registration.

We commit to providing a method for attendees to voluntarily display their vaccination status.

We encourage anyone with concerns about the available COVID-19 vaccines review the CDC Myths and Facts web page."

Tests:

"We expect attendees to have completed a COVID-19 PCR test within 72 hours or a rapid antigen test within three (3) hours before attending the event.

We encourage attendees to test daily during the event, during travel days to or from Seattle, and on the fifth (5th) day following the conclusion of the event to account for an incubation period.

We strive to offer COVID-19 rapid antigen tests for those with financial need, including financial aid recipients."

Ventilation:

"We strive to prioritize ventilation of event spaces through actions such as keeping doors and windows open.

We strive to maintain attendance that is limited below physical space capacities.

We commit to using CO₂ monitors as a proxy for ventilation levels throughout the conference."

Alternatives:

"We commit to providing remote participation options for presentations.

We strive to provide remote participation options for social events."

Reviewing against badging standard v2023-01

[chrisjrn]

This is a fork of the nbpy policy (#3). The key differences are:

• They have introduced an aspirational verb "strive", which is used with respect to availability of testing for financial aid recipients.
• They only "encourage" mask wearing in indoor spaces that are out of the control of the conference

With that in mind, I propose the following grading:

• Masking: Efforts made; could be increased to "robust" if masking were required of attendees in non-presentation spaces, however this would be impractical given the event's commitment to anonymous attendance -- an unmasked attendee could identify themselves as not actually being an attendee until they attempt to enter a presentation room
• Vaccines: Efforts made, could be increased to "robust" with vaccine verification
• Tests: No policy, could be increased to "efforts made" if the conference commits to providing tests to people with financial need
• Ventilation: Efforts made, outdoor ventilation options are limited. The conference could construct Corsi-Rosenthal boxes for air purification, but this would presumably be expensive.
• Alternatives: Robust (event is free to attend so refunds not required, remote participation options will be available)

[altsalt]

I would agree with all of the levels listed aside from:

* **Tests**: No policy, could be increased to "efforts made" if the conference commits to providing tests to people with financial need

The Event Badging Standard v2023-01 states: No Policy: No mention of tests.

We have clearly included language around tests and testing. If the intention of PHP is to have conferences provide tests, then the language of the badging standard needs to be updated.

[chrisjrn]

@altsalt per https://publichealthpledge.com/badging

The badging standard also states:

Efforts Made: Tests are made available and strongly recommended. No Policy: No mention of tests.

At the moment, the badging standard has no middle ground between "no policy" and "efforts made". The name "no policy" is somewhat unfortunate there. It should probably say "no enforceable policy" or something like that, to include cases like yours where clearly there's mention in the policy, but the policy doesn't provide a guarantee of (some level of) protection to attendees.

With that in mind, "no policy" means anything between "no mention of tests" and "tests are made available and strongly recommended". At the moment, you only "strongly recommend" tests, which is not enforceable.

In other badging discussions (e.g. #1), a commitment to provide tests for attendees with financial need was sufficient to meet the "tests are made available" criterion. This was to provide flexibility for events with budgetary constraints such as yours.

[joshsimmons]

@altsalt @chrisjrn Thank you both so much! You two have spotted an opportunity for improvement with the badging standard itself.

Here's my proposed path forward: let's go through the motions of this process, issue an initial grade, confirm SeaGL as a pledge signatory, and leave open the possibility of updating the grade in light of (1) improvements w/r/t tests by SeaGL, and/or (2) the next version of the badge standard approaching this specific measure with more nuance.

And in terms of public comms – because we're not trying to make anyone who is putting in the effort look bad – if you'd like, we could limit our announcement posts to the status of SeaGL as a signatory, and wait on the badge announcement until after one or both parties here get a few additional ducks in a row.

How does that sound?

[altsalt]

Generally sounds good to me, I just worry about being construed as having "no mention of tests" which is clearly wrong.

We will of course upgrade things if we receive a sponsor who is interested in supporting these measures.

Thanks for working through ways to make conferences more accessible and healthy.

[joshsimmons]

@altsalt Heya, I'm beginning to take a different, lighter-weight approach to the Public Health Pledge – one with less process and gatekeeping, and more recognizing people and teams who are putting in the work.

Do you reckon you and the rest of the SeaGL team would be open to being recognized as a signatory to the pledge?

[altsalt]

We are likely going to be changing our policy for this year. The lack of any sort or recognition last year was a bummer. I'll bring it up again and do think that SeaGL the org would be up for participating, but I know that there are individual organizers with reasons not to sign.

[joshsimmons]

Understood, and I'm sorry for that. This is a one person operation and being laid off last year was a huge setback for all of my volunteer work. I understand that doesn't make things better, though.

Whatever it is you all decide to do, I hope that you maintain high standards to make the event as safe and inclusive as possible.