Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 I stopped reading Jim Hill years ago for some of the reasons stated here. His "folksy" style drove me nuts, especially his "why for?" and various other quirky sayings. Then, his inconsistency, and never finishing series he starts. And, finally, just not that interesting.
Originally Posted By TP2000 "You can do that when you're the boss of your own site." Bingo! Thanks for the reminder, Jim. These are guys running their own amateur websites from their kitchen tables. They all seem like decent, nice guys who share our common interest in Disney theme parks. But they aren't professional journalists, I don't believe they've ever posed as such, and they offer their sites up to us for absolutely FREE. Don't like the stuff they have on their free website? Don't read them. In my opinion, what WDW needs most right now is someone like an Al Lutz with a few inside sources to reveal what's going on in TDO and explain why things are slipping and sliding as badly as they are in WDW right now; embarrassing 25 year old parades and stage shows, Avatarland quicksand, Fantasmic creaking along on 3 cylinders, MyMagic+ mysteries, DVC as The Blob That Ate Disney World, the total mess that is Disney Hollywood Studios, etc., etc. There's a whole lot of corporate intrigue and messy operation going on in WDW right now, on a much larger scale than ever happened during Disneyland Dark Age of 1997-2003. I wish there was someone back East who could be the Al Lutz for WDW and help expose some of that mess for us. They need the help more desperately with each passing day.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Don't like the stuff they have on their free website? Don't read them." Or read them and express your opinion. I see nothing wrong with that. "I wish there was someone back East who could be the Al Lutz for WDW and help expose some of that mess for us. They need the help more desperately with each passing day." Why not take your own advice? If you don't like WDW stop keeping track of developments there and stop visiting.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: In expressing negative opinions of something you continue to read that you don't like also carries with it a certain responsibility. Otherwise you risk coming across like someone who just enjoys whining for the sake of whining and that's not a very attractive trait to have. If something is bothering you to the point where you spend most of your time expressing all that negativity, well, you can come across as though you just enjoy being negative for the sake of being negative. Again--not a very appealing trait to be associated with.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt True, but you can't say "If you don't like it, then don't read it", and then start complaining about something that you personally don't like. I appreciate TP's posts, and I know that he means well, but that kind of attitude seems selfish to me. No one here has the right to go around telling posters when and how to express themselves in topics that are obviously open for conversation.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>In expressing negative opinions of something you continue to read that you don't like also carries with it a certain responsibility.<< Huh? The owner of a Disney blog posts facts and/or opinion and/or rumors and/or gossip. People are free to react to that in any way they like, and I'm not sure that requires any sort of responsibility.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA This reminds me of the tired arguments of days gone by... When people would either inform me that I was 'thinking too much' about an attraction's flaws. OR yes, the 'if you don't like it, then don't go' response. My approach? Similar to Kar2oonMan -- I'll read it, and if necessary, kvetch about the content of said story. Now get outa my yard!
Originally Posted By TP2000 I get your point Hans, actually. And I can, and have, complained about the weird folksy writing style and wrong predictions of Jim Hill in particular. But I still read him on occasion, although far less now than I did five years ago. I was aiming my comments more for the few folks who do nothing but complain about a specific blogger with no end in sight to their criticism and outright hatred for the person. That unfaltering hatred year after year for a person always has me thinking "Then why do you read him?". And WDW is still a complete mess. ;-)
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder I've always wondered, sequestered up in the middle of Nowhere, New England like he is, how he could possibly be privy to anything without learning about it second, third or fourth hand. I haven't been by his site in years. I became familiar with him after my little episode with his lunatic ex-wife, and went to the site during the Save Disney stuff, but lost interest when he posted some stuff that wasn't even remotely accurate and about something or other and then kept deleting comments. He's just another fan with a Disney blog, IMO.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: My sisters and I are on board with you, TP2000, duckling. The good point you are making is the same as ours. It's certainly all right to critique things. But when one critique's the same person in a negative way over and over again, that is something to be discouraged because it just promotes hatred and that's nothing any duckling around here should be involved with.
Originally Posted By doombuggy "He's just another fan with a Disney blog" That's how I feel about both of them how ever JH took it a step too far, charging and doing his own tours in the park. Then when he got caught and kicked out he tried to make him self the victim.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>But when one critique's the same person in a negative way over and over again, that is something to be discouraged because it just promotes hatred and that's nothing any duckling around here should be involved with.<< Mmmm hmmm. Does that include things written about various Disney execs, especially during the Pressler and Harris era? Or are they fair game?
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "I was aiming my comments more for the few folks who do nothing but complain about a specific blogger with no end in sight to their criticism and outright hatred for the person. That unfaltering hatred year after year for a person always has me thinking "Then why do you read him?"." Fair enough. It is silly to repeatedly indulge in something and then constantly complain about it over and over.
Originally Posted By schnebs <<JH took it a step too far, charging and doing his own tours in the park. Then when he got caught and kicked out he tried to make him self the victim.>> I dunno - I took one of Jim's tours, and frankly I thought the justification Disney cited for kicking him out was kinda hinky. I understand why they did it - as far as they were concerned, he was in direct competition with Disneyland's guided tours, and he was telling people stories that didn't fit the Company line. But rather than admit that, Disney tried to justify it by saying "we don't allow paid guided tours by third parties in the Park", when you could (and still can) find foreign tour groups doing it every day.
Originally Posted By TP2000 True Hans. But that kind of describes me going to DCA from 2001 to 2005. I used a lot of bandwidth complaining about that place back then! Now, I love DCA. And I think it might have edged Epcot out as my favorite "second park". As for Pressler and Harriss, they were game for the criticism, especially when they did all the softball media interviews they gave trying to win over the fans back then. I actually enjoyed Cynthia, because she was just soooooo fake and soooooo good at it. It was fun to watch her go, and I miss the 'ol gal. And thanks for the comments Witches! I always love hearing from you here. You've fascinated and entertained me for years, and I'm glad you are here with us.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "But rather than admit that, Disney tried to justify it by saying "we don't allow paid guided tours by third parties in the Park", when you could (and still can) find foreign tour groups doing it every day." Is it safe to assume that those operators have been sanctioned by Disney to conduct tours in the parks? "But that kind of describes me going to DCA from 2001 to 2005. I used a lot of bandwidth complaining about that place back then! " And I jumped right in the fray, lol. Still, even then, I thought most of the complaining about DCA went overboard, and the ridiculous vilifying of Disney management and whole "Save Disney" campaign was in poor taste. In all honesty what was said online during those years greatly contributed to my waning interest in visiting the parks. They were much more enjoyable when I didn't know all of the hyped up behind the scenes dirt and gossip.
Originally Posted By TP2000 Hans, that's why every year I contemplate but can't bring myself to read that DisneyWar book as my summer beach book. I already spend way too much time nerding out over this stuff online. So instead of reading DisneyWar, I just bring the July issue of Cosmopolitan Magazine to the beach and take and retake the Cosmo Sex Quiz.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: You have a valid question, Kar2oonMan, dear--and I understand your point. I suppose when you're in the sort of position Mr. Prssler was in, there is a certain amount of criticism for him that is well deserved, seeing as how it has been reported that he signed off on a memo which said, "We need to ride these attractions to failure." Anyone who makes a decision that ends up endangering the lives of the general public deserves to be taken to task. (Thinking of Thunder Mountain, here.) But the fact that Mr. Pressler was let go shortly after that awful time suggests that Mr. Lutz wasn't the only one who thought Mr. Pressler was a poor leader.
