try to have people come in singing on the chorus, and not worry so much about the verses
I think this is just massively obsolete, and dates back to people singing along without being able to read lyrics. Either because you didn't have printing, or people weren't (sufficiently) literate.
(Though there are also communities that intentionally don't involve written words in there folk singing, such as pub singers, which I do think can be a nice aesthetic. If that's what you're doing, then the format where someone sings the versus solo and everyone joins in on the chorus works well.)
On the 2012 Solstice, I do expect you had more people who enjoy this kind of singing. For example, @juliawise and I are both reasonably strong singers (including being comfortable picking things up on the fly) and I think a big part of why we were excited to come down from Boston was that the event involved singing. But I don't remember what fraction of the people that would have applied to.
I'm sorry, it's not up anymore. The code is still available if you wanted to host it, but part of why I took it down is that it depends on a Twilio video chat API that they've discontinued, so you would need to find some replacement for that.
How many people do you think this is each day? If it's 1,000 (train runs through busy areas, but most people don't cross tracks illegally) then the annual cost is ~3.7M minutes.
The the average person killed by a train would have had maybe another ~12M waking minutes [1], so fences that prevented even a death every three years would do more good than harm. And the number of tracks-crossers would have to be super high for fencing not to be worth it.
(But adding signaled crossings or overpasses could be worth it!)
[1] 60 min / hr * 16 waking hr / day * 365 day / year * 35 years
this is (slightly) better for humankind in the long run
We don't have to get into this here if you don't want to, but flagging that I'm not convinced of this.
It isn't quite an apples-to-apples comparison ... do worse by a factor of about 10
Thanks for looking into this! I am pretty skeptical of studies that don't explicitly compare the two options, because there are really quite a lot of variables that can go into measuring absolute effectiveness that are nicely factored out when you measure relative effectiveness.
The way it's supposed to work is that going from n95 to n100 should get you from 95% to 99.97% on the worst performing non-oilborne particle size, and then n100 to p100 would get you coverage for oilborne (which we don't expect to need for a pandemic, but is useful in industry). But I haven't looked into studies to verify that it does actually work that way in practice.
Please support your local hardware store over Jeff Bezos if you can!
Why?
You might still need to order the right kind of filters online.
Standard p100 filters should be sold anywhere these masks are, so I doubt that would be needed.
the devil tells you to make a train that's 500 times more deadly than average
Run the train where there are 500x the people?
The big advantage of far UVC (222nm) is that you don't have to point the lamps up, because, at least in moderation, it's safe to shine on people.
With traditional UVC (254nm) that kind of upward pointing installation is very common. Or, at least as common as UVC, which is to say, not very common.
Better yet, donate.
This takes you to a GWWC page that says:
You can donate to several promising programs working in this area via our donation platform. For our charity and fund recommendations, see our best charities page.
But if you click through those links you can see there isn't a biosecurity fund, and the list of biosecurity-related programs you can donate on GWWC are just NTI and CHS. Which are not bad options, but as someone in the field they're not where I think funding would go farthest. It would be really great if there were a bio fund, or a bio evaluator!
(Disclosure: I run a project that would plausibly be funded by such a thing)
1
My guess is that the problem is if you're getting advice from people who are in communities where it's uncommon to get large groups of people we're singing is not central to their identity unfamiliar songs. So they don't have a very relevant advice! Instead I would look for material aimed at religious leaders, camp counselors, and teachers. (But I have no idea if there is good advice out there, or if this is one of the many categories where the people who are good at it have not passed on their wisdom, and in many cases don't even realize there could add it.)