[Callers] Re: FW: Dances with fewer swings

Is it a coincidence that the move to more swings and the disappearance of contra corners happened simultaneously? Did we replace the energy of corners with that of swings? While I find swinging more fun than corners for a single instance, doing just one or the other isn't as good as doing both in an evening. Of course, swings often follow corners, and that's really great! I'm sure this list debated bringing back corners long before I joined, but let's! And...Chorus Jig! A whole line of us once secretly agreed to dance Chorus Jig instead of the surely-exciting dance Steve Z-A had painstakingly walked us through. It was a riot! It used to be that you could depend on everyone knowing that one dance by heart. Just, use short lines... Lisa Sievert wrote: swinging is perhaps the most dangerous thing we do while dancing, I’d like to see some new dances that emphasize partner swings and de-emphasize neighbor swings, and at least some dances without any swings. Without diminishing the very interesting thread that this has developed into on the merits of dance enjoyment, and acknowledging the innovative thinking that reducing exposure by choice of dance represents, has there been any scientific evidence that indicates a significant improvement in risk with different choreography? Dropping from, say, 20x the viral load needed for exposure to 16x is still very exposed and no practical change in risk. Dropping from 1.5x to 0.5x is a big improvement in risk. I'm curious if anyone has seen research reports assessing this kind of risk management, even in other activities. (Let's not debate opinions without data, please!) --jh-- On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 10:20 PM Chris Page via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote: