Originally Posted By Yookeroo "No, lets use a term that has to be stretched to aerospace usage and say that's 'abundantly clear.'" I understood what was meant. Seemed pretty clear to me.
Originally Posted By mousermerf <<<mousermerf I keep trying to keep an open mind about you and be nice, but you are awfully impolite sometimes. It's hard to imagine why you'd bother coming here if you think so poorly of everyone else here.>>> Sometimes I wonder why I bother posting at all. Take this thread for example: <a href="http://mb.laughingplace.com/MsgBoard-T-112777-P-4.asp?C=1" target="_blank">http://mb.laughingplace.com/Ms....asp?C=1</a> That's pretty typical for the WDW side of these forums. How am I supposed to have a glowing positive opinion after that?
Originally Posted By mousermerf <<<I understood what was meant. Seemed pretty clear to me.>>> I sincerely doubt that most, if any, reporting an understanding of the term as used in the context of that original post actually had any experience with it prior to this discussion.
Originally Posted By CuriouserConstance I'm not asking you to have a glowing opinion, I'm just wondering why you'd come here if you don't like talking to anyone.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <I sincerely doubt that most, if any, reporting an understanding of the term as used in the context of that original post actually had any experience with it prior to this discussion. > I do know some Latin, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that "in situ" would mean "in place." Seriously, you should consider getting over yourself. Right after you learn proper use of the English language you pretentiously claim you "won't let be destroyed without a fight."
Originally Posted By mickeymorris1234 Oh my goodness you people are still arguing over proper word use. Get a dictionary and read the definition and call it a night. Now I looked at some concept art for WoC and I noticed that Pirates is included it just wasn't mentioned in the D23 presentation. http://albums.mouseplanet.com/MPPromotional/dca4.jpg I think alice has been pulled for now. Also can you believe Bob changing things at the last moment like that!!! This is why executives need to get there two cents in sooner otherwise the show could have been going up in May!
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>I sincerely doubt that most, if any, reporting an understanding of the term as used in the context of that original post actually had any experience with it prior to this discussion.<< Oh brother. I promised myself I'd stay out of this incredibly dumb side track, but enough is enough. The use of the term "in situ" in the original post was not only correct, it was the most succinct term in context. It is one with which I am quite familiar. Also familiar to me is the term "a vista." Be assured, it is absolutely senseless in this context. First, the original exchange... Post #81: >>It really does break my heart to see this video on the internet. This is the problem with developing a show in-situ for all to see.<< Post #85: >>You meant "a vista." It's a theatrical term, it's latin, literally means "in sight." As in doing a scene change or other theatrical work technical stuff required for a show "in sight" of the audience.<< In situ means "in place." A vista means "in sight." But as a theatrical term (really, the only context in which "a vista" is typically used), it has a very specific meaning. To wit: >>A change of setting / scenery unhidden from the audience. This technique is increasingly popular due to modern advances in scenic automation, where entire set changes can be accomplished in seconds.<< <a href="http://www.theatrecrafts.com/glossary/resultscat.php" target="_blank">http://www.theatrecrafts.com/g...scat.php</a> "Theatrical work technical stuff" is not done a vista. Set changes are. And as the discussion is, indeed, about "theatrical work technical stuff" (ie: the development of a new production) "a vista" would be a senseless substitution for the correct term, "in situ." P.S. Also against my better judgement, I will explain that I am very familiar with the term "a vista" as I hold an MFA in theater design, and have been designing "a vista" set changes for over 30 years. I have never heard the term used in anything remotely approaching the context suggested by our contentious poster. That's all.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Get a dictionary and read the definition and call it a night.<< You can say that again!
Originally Posted By mousermerf A 30 year career in theater and no one has ever heard of you.. I'm sure it's quite illustrious.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>A 30 year career in theater and no one has ever heard of you.. I'm sure it's quite illustrious.<< Ah, another sterling example of how you "contribute and don't -just- insult others." <a href="http://mb.laughingplace.com/MsgBoard-T-112777-P-4.asp?C=1" target="_blank">http://mb.laughingplace.com/Ms....asp?C=1</a>
Originally Posted By DlandDug P.S. Care to respond with something constructive to this broken-down, unknown old theater maven?
Originally Posted By DlandDug So, I guess that means you really did use the term "a vista" in completely the wrong context. That's all.
Originally Posted By DlandDug I mean... while my career hasn't been all that "illustrious," (sniff sniff), at least I know the difference between "in situ" and "a vista." So... all is not lost, anyway...
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "A 30 year career in theater and no one has ever heard of you.. I'm sure it's quite illustrious." Wow, you really are something aren't you? You've been proven wrong and yet you still won't let up. Amazing.
Originally Posted By mousermerf I have not been proven wrong. "Adj. 1. in-situ - being in the original position; not having been moved; "the archeologists could date the vase because it was in-situ"; "an in-situ investigator" unmoved unaltered, unchanged - remaining in an original state; "persisting unaltered through time" It means the -original- place and that's the important part - not just "in place." thus "unmoved" is a better likeness for the term.
Originally Posted By avatarmickey115 Ok, wow...this is pretty pethetic...i have only been here for a few weeks but im gonna have to get personal with this...cant we all just get back on topic and stop arguing about this? i came here to talk about disney but now im faced with another forum with drama. whoever is causing this, please stop, i just wanna get back on track so we can ALL enjoy this forum. back on the page with posts 111-120, we were talking about the problems we've been having with the site, but now it works for me! is anyone else still having those problems? anyways, i think the show is looking very impressive, although i think it would have been nice if they had fire works somewhere in there. I couldnt tell if they did. does anyone know if they do?
