This content is currently blocked. The content is either under review by SeeClickFix or has been confirmed by SeeClickFix for violation(s) of SeeClickFix Terms of Use (https://www.civicplus.com/terms-of-service). Content that aligns with SeeClickFix Terms of Use will be posted, and content that does not align with our Terms of Use will not be permitted for public viewing.

O: What an apt name. I'm not sure why you feel you had to take all that time you must've taken to compose such a patronizing and actually threatening comment to my post, but perhaps if you have a complaint about any legalities you should take that up with SeeClickFix, who opted to publish my Request.

In the meantime, here is the start of some of the published materials. And while I will concede that bandanas don't "do nothing", they are found to be the very least effective means of barrier protection from COVID-19.

https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0016018

Lastly, since you know nothing of the characteristic rate or composition of pedestrians in this neighborhood, perhaps you should reserve your own opinion until you have more information.

It has been known and widely circulated for months that bandanas do next to nothing to protect us from the user's breath, because the fabric is too loosely woven. The Surgeon General had to re-shoot his video on how to make masks without sewing because he'd used a bandana. I'm shocked that the city doesn't acknowledge that. I think it's because the governor's order doesn't. Baker is stuck between his rationality and a boss who wants all the states open and refuses to wear a mask himself. He used to err, if that's the word, on the side of human life and health, is now erring on the president's.

Ms Richards,

If I criticize you because you are requesting enforcement of a law which does not exist on the books, that is not patronizing. And, if I inform you that you have engaged in conduct for which the aggrieved party could seek (and probably receive) injunctive relief and substantial monetary damages yet I also specifically inform you in writing that "I'm not going to pursue the matter further", that is not threatening.

Insofar as your attempt to hide behind the platform in terms of liability, it is futile. You are the author. They might have some liability if the aggrieved person asked them to remove the post and they didn't, but even in that scenario the primary liability would still be yours.

In terms of why I took the time, well, because I saw those people's rights being violated. Their behavior is within the parameters of the current law. As such, they have a right not to be publicly disparaged.

"Lastly", I do know the composition of pedestrians in your neighborhood very well - 65% oxygen, 18.5% carbon, 9.5% hydrogen, 3.2% nitrogen, 1.5% calcium, 1.0% phosphorus etc. And more seriously, although you are right in that I am not familiar with the foot traffic patterns in your neighborhood, they also don't matter, just like your opinion about bandanas, because the city officials on this platform are empowered only to discharge their official duty in the context of existing laws, which, as we have discussed ad nauseam, allows cloth coverings and allows removal of any covering during the summer months when socially distanced.

So, once again, as a fellow resident, I'm asking for your help in keeping our discourse clean by raising only factually valid concerns and not shaming people with candid photos of them while they are doing nothing wrong to begin with.

Thank you for reporting. We've shared this with Public Works to ask them to reach out to the contractor to confirm proper use of face coverings.