This is what I don't understand.
So, if you eliminate distancing while in restaurants, a time when clearly you are not wearing a mask. You've eliminated both masking and distance while in a restaurant.
What's the point of masking (or distance) in any other location then?
Is there some "it's cools to have increased exposure risk while eating inside, you could have picked to eat outside, but since there's only one of these indoor ride/show/store things we don't want to expose you there when there's no other choice".
Did they upgrade the ventilation while we were not looking in all the restaurants with reduced distance? I haven't checked the permit thread, maybe I missed it.
I guess some people may choose to never dine indoors. But, seems like most will at some point. Once you're doing that, what's the point anywhere else? Are they going to suggest that unvaccinated people shouldn't eat indoors where distance is reduced?
Enforcement should be interesting for 6 to 11 year old kids,
not.
To me, if we're good with the FL infection level, really the US since guests come from all over, to not need any mitigations while an unvaccinated person is eating in a restaurant, then we should be good enough to not need mitigations anywhere else too.
I make no judgement on if the level is "good enough", for some it is, for others it's not. If someone is in the not camp, they've got 4 days to adjust. I would guess most people (but not all) who already have reservations think "it's good enough already".