Smart Restart APS- ventilation studies

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wait why are the secondary schools having kids meet in the gym before school?

They’re not, people don’t know what they’re talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t get to publish “your improved data” and then refuse to share it for replication or examination.

This is insane that people are listening to her.

Having lots of numbers and visuals doesn’t make you right.

I agree 100%. I didn’t really have an opinion on it until I saw she refused to share her backup and calculations because she didn’t want people to poke holes in her argument. I cannot take her seriously after that. That’s not how any numbers based evaluation works.

That thread is a big yikes.

Serious smackdown from Frank Bellavia.

Now I need to go find this.

LOL. He *received* a smackdown.

That would be the perception of observers who have fallen for the faulty interpretation and manipulation of the FOIA data, yes. The cargo cult of AEM.

LOL. A few posters tore apart his first post using data provided from APS. He acquiesced and said he’d work on it.

Total smack down.

Ha ha ha! Nothing like that happened. His “acquiescence” was informing the community that APS is paying a consultant for a complex conversion from one unit per minute to a different unit per hour. You know, since people are publicizing f’d up conclusions because they aren’t experts and have no idea what they’re doing.

Of course it did. Stop lying. **She** pointed out several inaccuracies or gaps in the data and analysis completed by APS/the consultants. He ultimately agreed with her.

Are we talking about two different FB threads? Because he posted twice, the second post being this:

“APS schools must comply with the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code, which follows ASHRAE Standard 62.1 Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality. On December 3, 2020, APS received a FOIA request for data, reports and emails between APS and CMTA and any other consultants APS is using to evaluate ventilation in its schools. All data provided in response to this request was in cubic feet per minute, rather than air changes per hour, because ASHRAE Standard 62.1 is based on cubic feet per minute. APS is not required under FOIA to create new data on air changes per hour that it does not already have. However, given the amount of interest in this topic, APS has asked and is paying CMTA to perform the complex conversion from cubic feet per minute to air changes per hour for APS schools and expects to post the conversion on the APS website next week.”

You can stop calling people liars now.

Yes. This was what she said was needed. And pointed out that the data currently available to calculate that (air volumes, etc.) was questionable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t get to publish “your improved data” and then refuse to share it for replication or examination.

This is insane that people are listening to her.

Having lots of numbers and visuals doesn’t make you right.

I agree 100%. I didn’t really have an opinion on it until I saw she refused to share her backup and calculations because she didn’t want people to poke holes in her argument. I cannot take her seriously after that. That’s not how any numbers based evaluation works.

That thread is a big yikes.

Serious smackdown from Frank Bellavia.

Now I need to go find this.

LOL. He *received* a smackdown.

That would be the perception of observers who have fallen for the faulty interpretation and manipulation of the FOIA data, yes. The cargo cult of AEM.

LOL. A few posters tore apart his first post using data provided from APS. He acquiesced and said he’d work on it.

Total smack down.

Ha ha ha! Nothing like that happened. His “acquiescence” was informing the community that APS is paying a consultant for a complex conversion from one unit per minute to a different unit per hour. You know, since people are publicizing f’d up conclusions because they aren’t experts and have no idea what they’re doing.

Of course it did. Stop lying. **She** pointed out several inaccuracies or gaps in the data and analysis completed by APS/the consultants. He ultimately agreed with her.

Are we talking about two different FB threads? Because he posted twice, the second post being this:

“APS schools must comply with the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code, which follows ASHRAE Standard 62.1 Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality. On December 3, 2020, APS received a FOIA request for data, reports and emails between APS and CMTA and any other consultants APS is using to evaluate ventilation in its schools. All data provided in response to this request was in cubic feet per minute, rather than air changes per hour, because ASHRAE Standard 62.1 is based on cubic feet per minute. APS is not required under FOIA to create new data on air changes per hour that it does not already have. However, given the amount of interest in this topic, APS has asked and is paying CMTA to perform the complex conversion from cubic feet per minute to air changes per hour for APS schools and expects to post the conversion on the APS website next week.”

You can stop calling people liars now.

Yes. This was what she said was needed. And pointed out that the data currently available to calculate that (air volumes, etc.) was questionable.

I’m sorry you don’t know how to process what you read. Have a good day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t get to publish “your improved data” and then refuse to share it for replication or examination.

This is insane that people are listening to her.

Having lots of numbers and visuals doesn’t make you right.

I agree 100%. I didn’t really have an opinion on it until I saw she refused to share her backup and calculations because she didn’t want people to poke holes in her argument. I cannot take her seriously after that. That’s not how any numbers based evaluation works.

That thread is a big yikes.

Serious smackdown from Frank Bellavia.

Now I need to go find this.

LOL. He *received* a smackdown.

That would be the perception of observers who have fallen for the faulty interpretation and manipulation of the FOIA data, yes. The cargo cult of AEM.

LOL. A few posters tore apart his first post using data provided from APS. He acquiesced and said he’d work on it.

Total smack down.

Ha ha ha! Nothing like that happened. His “acquiescence” was informing the community that APS is paying a consultant for a complex conversion from one unit per minute to a different unit per hour. You know, since people are publicizing f’d up conclusions because they aren’t experts and have no idea what they’re doing.

Of course it did. Stop lying. **She** pointed out several inaccuracies or gaps in the data and analysis completed by APS/the consultants. He ultimately agreed with her.

Are we talking about two different FB threads? Because he posted twice, the second post being this:

“APS schools must comply with the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code, which follows ASHRAE Standard 62.1 Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality. On December 3, 2020, APS received a FOIA request for data, reports and emails between APS and CMTA and any other consultants APS is using to evaluate ventilation in its schools. All data provided in response to this request was in cubic feet per minute, rather than air changes per hour, because ASHRAE Standard 62.1 is based on cubic feet per minute. APS is not required under FOIA to create new data on air changes per hour that it does not already have. However, given the amount of interest in this topic, APS has asked and is paying CMTA to perform the complex conversion from cubic feet per minute to air changes per hour for APS schools and expects to post the conversion on the APS website next week.”

You can stop calling people liars now.

Yes. This was what she said was needed. And pointed out that the data currently available to calculate that (air volumes, etc.) was questionable.

And APS was already working on it. Smart Restart had nothing to do with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait why are the secondary schools having kids meet in the gym before school?

They’re not, people don’t know what they’re talking about.

Yep. They are. Announced at WMS PTA meeting!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait why are the secondary schools having kids meet in the gym before school?

They’re not, people don’t know what they’re talking about.

WMS facilities manager said this is what they were doing on the Tuesday PTA call. Would you like the link?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t get to publish “your improved data” and then refuse to share it for replication or examination.

This is insane that people are listening to her.

Having lots of numbers and visuals doesn’t make you right.

I agree 100%. I didn’t really have an opinion on it until I saw she refused to share her backup and calculations because she didn’t want people to poke holes in her argument. I cannot take her seriously after that. That’s not how any numbers based evaluation works.

That thread is a big yikes.

Serious smackdown from Frank Bellavia.

Now I need to go find this.

LOL. He *received* a smackdown.

That would be the perception of observers who have fallen for the faulty interpretation and manipulation of the FOIA data, yes. The cargo cult of AEM.

LOL. A few posters tore apart his first post using data provided from APS. He acquiesced and said he’d work on it.

Total smack down.

Ha ha ha! Nothing like that happened. His “acquiescence” was informing the community that APS is paying a consultant for a complex conversion from one unit per minute to a different unit per hour. You know, since people are publicizing f’d up conclusions because they aren’t experts and have no idea what they’re doing.

Of course it did. Stop lying. **She** pointed out several inaccuracies or gaps in the data and analysis completed by APS/the consultants. He ultimately agreed with her.

DP. Not even close, but doesn’t surprise me you have such an inflated sense of your impact.

“My impact”? Who do you think I am?

Someone who is very invested in making sure people think the smart restart report is correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t get to publish “your improved data” and then refuse to share it for replication or examination.

This is insane that people are listening to her.

Having lots of numbers and visuals doesn’t make you right.

I agree 100%. I didn’t really have an opinion on it until I saw she refused to share her backup and calculations because she didn’t want people to poke holes in her argument. I cannot take her seriously after that. That’s not how any numbers based evaluation works.

That thread is a big yikes.

Serious smackdown from Frank Bellavia.

Now I need to go find this.

LOL. He *received* a smackdown.

That would be the perception of observers who have fallen for the faulty interpretation and manipulation of the FOIA data, yes. The cargo cult of AEM.

LOL. A few posters tore apart his first post using data provided from APS. He acquiesced and said he’d work on it.

Total smack down.

Ha ha ha! Nothing like that happened. His “acquiescence” was informing the community that APS is paying a consultant for a complex conversion from one unit per minute to a different unit per hour. You know, since people are publicizing f’d up conclusions because they aren’t experts and have no idea what they’re doing.

Of course it did. Stop lying. **She** pointed out several inaccuracies or gaps in the data and analysis completed by APS/the consultants. He ultimately agreed with her.

DP. Not even close, but doesn’t surprise me you have such an inflated sense of your impact.

“My impact”? Who do you think I am?

Someone who is very invested in making sure people think the smart restart report is correct.

I am invested in that my kids are going back in person in a few weeks and I want them to be safe.

I want classrooms to have 4-6 ACH. Put air cleaners in there, if necessary. Ideally, APS would have already assessed this accurately and shared data with the community, AND installed air cleaners where needed. This hasn’t happened yet.

I also don’t want my kids eating lunch in a cafeteria with 50-100 kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait why are the secondary schools having kids meet in the gym before school?

They’re not, people don’t know what they’re talking about.

Yep. They are. Announced at WMS PTA meeting!

Not everyone is at WMS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t get to publish “your improved data” and then refuse to share it for replication or examination.

This is insane that people are listening to her.

Having lots of numbers and visuals doesn’t make you right.

I agree 100%. I didn’t really have an opinion on it until I saw she refused to share her backup and calculations because she didn’t want people to poke holes in her argument. I cannot take her seriously after that. That’s not how any numbers based evaluation works.

That thread is a big yikes.

Serious smackdown from Frank Bellavia.

Now I need to go find this.

LOL. He *received* a smackdown.

That would be the perception of observers who have fallen for the faulty interpretation and manipulation of the FOIA data, yes. The cargo cult of AEM.

LOL. A few posters tore apart his first post using data provided from APS. He acquiesced and said he’d work on it.

Total smack down.

Ha ha ha! Nothing like that happened. His “acquiescence” was informing the community that APS is paying a consultant for a complex conversion from one unit per minute to a different unit per hour. You know, since people are publicizing f’d up conclusions because they aren’t experts and have no idea what they’re doing.

Of course it did. Stop lying. **She** pointed out several inaccuracies or gaps in the data and analysis completed by APS/the consultants. He ultimately agreed with her.

DP. Not even close, but doesn’t surprise me you have such an inflated sense of your impact.

“My impact”? Who do you think I am?

Someone who is very invested in making sure people think the smart restart report is correct.

I am invested in that my kids are going back in person in a few weeks and I want them to be safe.

I want classrooms to have 4-6 ACH. Put air cleaners in there, if necessary. Ideally, APS would have already assessed this accurately and shared data with the community, AND installed air cleaners where needed. This hasn’t happened yet.

I also don’t want my kids eating lunch in a cafeteria with 50-100 kids.

Yes, we know you think very highly of your non-reviewed work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait why are the secondary schools having kids meet in the gym before school?

They’re not, people don’t know what they’re talking about.

Yep. They are. Announced at WMS PTA meeting!

Not everyone is at WMS

Correct. 100 kids in the gym. 100 in the cafeteria. 90 in the auditorium. Is that comforting to you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait why are the secondary schools having kids meet in the gym before school?

They’re not, people don’t know what they’re talking about.

Yep. They are. Announced at WMS PTA meeting!

Not everyone is at WMS

Correct. 100 kids in the gym. 100 in the cafeteria. 90 in the auditorium. Is that comforting to you?

Did you mean to respond to a different post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait why are the secondary schools having kids meet in the gym before school?

They’re not, people don’t know what they’re talking about.

Yep. They are. Announced at WMS PTA meeting!

Not everyone is at WMS

The point is that this battle for basic, common sense safety shouldn’t have to be fought school by school. APS should have standard protocols to keep students in small groups, to avoid super spreader lunches, etc. They are not ready at the middle and high schools. They’ve got a lot of work to do before March 9. The fact that anyone thinks these plans ensure student safety at the most basic level of CDC recommendations is shocking. They’re not doi what need to be done to open safely in middle and high. Period.

[Anonymous]

Even though I do not feel comfortable with the plan (100 kids eating together, and all the kids congregating before school), I do appreciate the transparency from WMS. Seems like some other principals are still holding their plans close to chest. I'd rather know now than when its too late.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Even though I do not feel comfortable with the plan (100 kids eating together, and all the kids congregating before school), I do appreciate the transparency from WMS. Seems like some other principals are still holding their plans close to chest. I'd rather know now than when its too late.

Agreed. Grateful to know so I can keep my kids home. They are not sugar coating it.