Well, the consensus is that the no music after midnight rule was an attempt to squash the western lifestyle(it had serious impact on the likelihood of the musicians and the venues). At places where the rule was enforced people simply continue their night somewhere without live music. It made no sense in the context of Covid, it made sense in the context of islamist trying to destroy the non-islamists.

Anyway, what's the difference between a rule and a guideline? Is a red light a rule or guide? IMHO Guideline is a literature, rules are arrangements with an intent(i.e. let's agree to stop on red light with the intent of organising the flow so we don't crash into each other).

> Anyway, what's the difference between a rule and a guideline? Is a red light a rule or guide?

Guideline: don't bother neighbours after 20:00

Rule: Loud noises not allowed after 20:00

If you make sure to steer clear from guideline ("hey neighbour, we want to have a party, will it be okay if we be loud till 00:00","thanks"), the rules will not need to be enforced (neighbour calling the police to complain)

Now imagine you are not, in fact, on good terms with your neighbour, as sometimes happens. How should you behave in order to not spend every single evening arguing over the meaning of "bother neighbour" with the police?

A more rigid definition serves to protect you, not just your neighbour.

Rule: Loud noises not allowed after 20:00 unless permission have been given from neighbours. No loud noises after 23.

Much better than a guideline in my opinion.

And how do you confirm all neighbours have agreed? What's the radius for neighbours? What about extortion to get neighbors to agree?

Status quo is much simpler - it's banned but if neighbours all agree have a late party and police aren't called

>Status quo is much simpler - it's banned but if neighbours all agree have a late party and police aren't called

How is that any different to what I just wrote? In your own example, the "What's the radius" and "How do you confirm all have agreed" is no different either.

because your rule is impossible to enforce.

I don't disagree but running around neighbourhood with piece of paper titled "permission to party" and asking people to sign it would feel weird.

* * *

Right till neighbour changes their mind and pisses on your verbal agreement and you have nothing to go by.

>At places where the rule was enforced people simply continue their night somewhere without live music.

Live music doesn't / didn't attract more people in closer proximity than areas with no live music? Did everyone still go to the same place and sat there in silence? That sounds very unlikely, but I have never been to Turkey.

>It made no sense in the context of Covid, it made sense in the context of islamist trying to destroy the non-islamists.

This is tied to the above, but who made the consensus that this was the point of the rule? Without a source of the consensus and to someone who have never been there it flies in the face of logic. Surely fewer people would go to, say, a British park Saturday evening if there's no music event there than if there is a band playing. Without some context, it reads to me like this post is anti-islamist and bashing Turkey for a rule that seem to have been enforced in one way or another in most of the west under COVID. As far as I know, every festival was shut down and events with music or other entertainment had to jump through lots of hoops or be shutdown too. How is this rule different?

It’s 100% ridiculous.

The virus doesn’t care when the gathering is happening.

So why would you forbid live music, or gatherings, but only after midnight?!

That's why it's a ridiculous rule. It's arbitrary and subject to selective enforcement.

But as a guideline you could say if it's after midnight it's probably a party. And if it's not you let people use their judgment, because guidelines are suggestions enforced via social pressure, not via official penalties.

Still ridiculous.

If you forbid parties after midnight, people will party before midnight (have you been to London?).

If you forbid parties, people will still gather ("you're seriously calling our chess playing night a party?!").

If you want to forbid people gathering, forbid people gathering.

It was clearly targeting the secular folks and the musicians, which are predominantly secular and from the opposition.

Ban on gatherings were introduced for short periods at the hight of the pandemic, the music ban was a separate one which lasted up until days ago.

All other kind of gatherings were allowed. They even held a large religious gathering , bringing people from all around the to the conversion of the Hagia Sophia museum into a mosque since it was also a political event(They were promising to turn it into a mosque since years, apparently an important thing for the devout muslims). This was between the first wave which claimed the lives of 50K and the 3rd wave which killed that many more.