TheAdvocate: Old Mouse, New Tricks

Originally Posted By cstephens


Britain wrote:
> Sheesh, I get back home, turn on the net and what do I find? Complaints about MY opinion about the article. What else are these discussion boards for if not to share our opinions of how on- or off- target the article was?

You're correct that the discussion board is for sharing our opinions, but we can have opinions about articles, and we can also have comments about what someone posts. That's all part of the discussion as well.


> It's nice to see more opinions on the actual article within the last few posts. If I disagree, I'm going to say so, and if you agree, I'd hope you say so instead of saying, "Geez, man, those guys who just insult other people for liking DCA are jerks."

And if you disagree, that's ok to say so. Some of us have an objection to the way you said it, so we said so as well.

If anyone on these boards ever called someone else a jerk, I'm sure the post would be admined promptly. But I do think it's inappropriate for people to insult others simply for liking DCA, and that happens quite a bit, on this board and others as well.



/cs

 

Originally Posted By Park Hopper

***DCA BASH WARNING***

I am going to bash DCA a little. If this bothers you, don't read any further. You have been warned.

>>Visitors can close their eyes, feel the warm California sun on their faces and imagine themselves on the Coast, without the nasty smells and trash washing up on shore. <<


I often close my eyes as I walk through Paradise Pier. Unfortunatly, when I open them, it's still there.

 

Originally Posted By AgentLaRue

<<***DCA BASH WARNING***>>

I understand this is done in jest, but it again raises a familiar refrain. And this post is not directed at the author of the above quote or anyone in particular.

It seems that people constantly misunderstand a common complaint: characterizations of people based on their views. No one cares if someone doesn't like DCA. You can hate DCA, the Pope, even Mother Theresa, for goodness sakes.

What people get offended by is never that someone doesn't like DCA. It's the characterizations of those who have the audacity to differ with that view. Criticize away at the park, as many agree with thoughtful criticisms of the park, but don't attribute assumed characteristics to people who disagree with you.

Are people who don't like DCA pretentious, intolerant, unobservant... [insert prejudicial adjective here]? No, and people who don't feel the same aren't otherwise.

Criticize the park: fair game. Judge people based on their views, be prepared for those judgments to be criticized. It's that simple.

 

Originally Posted By Park Hopper

AngentLaRue,

Not everyone who likes DCA is as rational as you are. People do get tired of the DCA bashing. It's so relentless, how could they not?

Personally, I try to avoid engaging in bashing but sometimes the temptation is too strong. There are a lot of things I like about DCA but Paradise Pier is NOT one of them.

 

Originally Posted By gadzuux

Doobie has "chided" me in the past when I suggested that pro-DCA'ers are a wee bit defensive. His feeling is that there's enough defensiveness to go around, and that both sides of the coin are evenly represented.

I don't think so. My own informal survey shows that when someone posts something derogatory about DCA, many of the DCA booster-backers take personal humbrage, as if their personal tastes are being maligned.

Honestly, I feel like I have to tiptoe around here sometimes because I've had people feel that I was personally attacking them when I made disparaging comments about DCA and specifically about PP.

They like PP pretty much as is, and anyone with the temerity to point out shortcomings is, by inference, also questioning their credibility.

The people that have posted on this string endorsing the Advocate article (how ironic!) and that finally some publication has printed a favorable piece about the park are all too willing to dismiss the other dozen or so articles with a less enthusiastic view as being biased and unbalanced. Yet when something turns up that validates their opinion of the park, it's the best article yet!

I've refrained from posting on this thread before now, because the rhetoric directed at those posters who took exception to the article was a mite strong. My point now is not whether or not the article was accurate, but that those who express indignation at the naysayers are laying it on a bit thick.

It also seems to me that the number of posters who fall in to the "disappointed with DCA" category outnumber those in the "enchanted with DCA" category. So the Pro-DCA side may be outnumbered, but they make up for it in the strength of their convictions and their "vocalness".

So try to not suspect the "worst" when someone posts opinions that don't align with yours. Chances are that the poster bears you no ill-will, and never intended to attack or even upset anyone.

 

Originally Posted By Doobie

gadzuux: I respect your opinion on this matter, but I respectfully disagree. This topic is the perfect example - the poster didn't just disagree with the article, the poster said he must be easily amused. That is an insult (intended or not) to the author of the article and those who agree. And that's what elicited (sp?) the response in this topic, not the disagreement.

On the whole, I'd agree DCA backers are more defensive than detractors. On the whole, I'd also say DCA detractors and more offsenive than the backers. Look at all the topics that have very little or anything to do with DCA that end up having "DCA bashing" in them.

<<<
My point now is not whether or not the article was accurate, but that those who express indignation at the naysayers are laying it on a bit thick.
>>>

The immediete reaction that was heard form the DCA backers in this topic was not related to the article. It was related to the perceived insult (which I felt was insulting as well and that's why I posted). You may feel the reaction was too strong, but remember it's not just this incident. It's the culmination of a general feeling felt by many DCA fans have gotten from many posts here and elsewhere. The implication that if you like DCA, you're less critical/easily amused/wearing blinders, etc...

So if you think DCA backers are extremely defensive, you may be right. But I don't think they're being defensive over the park as much as they are being defensive of themselves - a reaction to the offense displayed by some (here and elsewhere). Then the DCA detractors take offense that the backers get so defensive and it goes back and forth and the general feeling arises that their side is getting the short end of the stick and the world is against them. In reality (again, in my opinion based on my having read most of the posts on this site and many on other sites), both sides could stand to be a little less insulting of the other. Both sides could stand to realize not everything is a personal attack. And both sides should remember there is no "right" answer, just opinions - each equally valid (in this forum anyway). And I don't separate myself out of it either, I've lost my temper a time or two (though I was careful not to violate Community Standards But it's a passionate subject. Disney inspires passion in people. It's part of the reason they've been so successful and without it LP wouldn't exist. So good, bad or indifferent - it's just a part of the program here. Overall, I think things have gone pretty well. and despite my comments above, I do applaud everyone here who's posted over the past few months for - on the whole - doing a great job with expressing opinions while keeping LP a more-or-less friendly place.

Whew - didn't mean to say all that!

Doobie.

 

Originally Posted By JeffG

Keep in mind that perceptions such as the ones that Gadzuux just described likely depend >very< much on one's own point-of-view. To be perfectly honest, my own perceptions would be pretty much the polar opposite of what he described.

It has often seemed to me that some of the most avidly anti-DCA individuals are completely unwilling to ever let any positive reactions to the park go unchallenged. I couldn't even begin to count the number of times that threads that were meant to ask a straightforward question, such as the recent thread asking for suggestions of where best to view the Electrical Parade, have quickly been interrupted by snide remarks with no purpose other than to bash the park. Gadzuux suggests that he has sometimes been hesitant to post his honest views, but I certainly have also felt that way on a number of occasions.

It has also often seemed to me that those of us with positive views of the park have had good reason to take some of the negative comments personally. Whether it is the intended message or not, many of the negative comments seem to be directed as much towards those that disagree as they are towards the park itself. Many times, I have seen posts that have seemed to be saying that those of us that enjoy the park are less discerning, less sophisticated, or that we somehow are non-respectful of the legacy of Walt Disney.

As for reactions to reviews such as this one, I fully and completely recognize that the writer was expressing her own opinion and that other's opinions may vary. I'll openly admit that I probably will lend a higher amount validity to this writer's opinions since many of them echo my own. It is perfectly normal to respond more positively to an article when you agree with it.

Once again, though, I will openly acknowledge that my own perceptions are likely heavily impacted by my own point-of-view. I'm sure that I am a lot more apt to perceive a sense of being attacked when it is my own views or those that share my views that are on the receiving end of the attacks.

I really do not know which point-of-view likely outnumbers the other among folks on this discussion board. Perhaps it would be interesting to try and do a tally of how many people generally post positive comments versus how many generally post negative ones. My gut feeling would be that those with a positive view probably outnumber those with a negative view, but that the negative views tend to be posted more often. That seems to be the opposite of what Gadzuux says he has perceived, though, so this could very well be another matter of perception. Perhaps the numbers are fairly even...

-Jeff

 

Originally Posted By Britain

For what it is worth, I, "The Poster" (man, I sound like a comic book character! I can see it now, Mr. Glass and The Poster!) was the one who said the author of the article was easily amused.

I did not mean this as an insult, I mean it as a criticism. There is a difference, and, I'll admit, it is easier to tell the difference when one hears one's tone of voice. But I did just mean to say that I don't think the author was holding DCA to a high enough standard. That doesn't mean the author is an idiot, or that there is anything wrong with the person herself.

I was attacking the critique, not the critic.

Anyway, I now kinda feel proud that my percieved insult started this discussion on the "deeper" issue of Pro-DCA vs. Anti-DCA.

I personally think DCA is a really fun park, I'm just not going to close my eyes to the fact that the company has been getting cheap lately, and they tried to build DCA as cheaply as possible.






NOT THAT ANYONE WHO DISAGREES IS CLOSING THEIR EYES OR IS IGNORANT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT!

 

Originally Posted By jonvn

"I, "The Poster" (man, I sound like a comic book character! "

Do you have theme music?

"Many times, I have seen posts that have seemed to be saying that those of us that enjoy the park are less discerning, less sophisticated, or that we somehow are non-respectful of the legacy of Walt Disney."

That's what is really annoying, I find. If I don't find some particular small thing to be so upsetting that I let it ruin my enjoyment, then I'm a betrayer of all things Disney, or I have no idea what Disney means, or some other thing. It really makes things unpleasant.

 

Originally Posted By woody

>>Criticize away at the park, as many agree with thoughtful criticisms of the park, but don't attribute assumed characteristics to people who disagree with you.

Why bother? No one likes criticism against their favorite new park.

 

Originally Posted By hopemax

I've hesitated from posting in this thread, but I feel I must.

I do not feel the original comment "easy to amuse" was an insult. If it is an insult than the other end of the spectrum
saying someone is "never satisfied" or "always difficult to please" must also be taken as an insults. However those are phrases that are used repeadly in this group. In those cases, there is rarely a public response from the webmaster like the one above. And when there is it always contains the idea that people have the right to be negative here too.

The problem is from where I sit on the DCA detractor side (I can't speak for others), I'm not trying to be negative, I am not trying to bash! I have what I feel are valid criticisms and I try to back them up with examples and explanations for why I feel the way I do and not just mindless ranting. To be called negative or a basher is very insulting. It is very upsetting to read insinuations that there is something wrong with you because you point out problems. The insinuations that you must be an unhappy person who likes to ruin things for others by pointing out things that are wrong.

I'm sorry, but I'm an analytical type of person. I enjoy breaking things down and seeing how things work and fixing things when they don't whether it be speculating about an amusement park in S. CA or my mother's vacuum cleaner in the middle of the dining room floor. I can seperate my emotions and evalute things from an emotional perspective while I am actually at a place, but then come back at a different point of time and evaluate things from a more analytical perspective.

And that's probably part of the problem. From my analytical mind saying someone is easy or hard to amuse is just a statement of fact. Go into a nursery and you'll find some kids are happy playing with a piece of string and a box, and other kids need an activity board and a See-and-Say. Why is that any different for adults? It doesn't make anyone better or worse than the other. But from an emotional perspective I can see it could be interpreted as an insult.

[I refreshed so I read JeffG's post]
Yes, perspective is everything and I've seen posts where the purpose is to analyze DCA or whatever from a more non-emotional point of view, and inevitably someone comes in and says, "But I like ____" and the thread takes off in the "is it okay to like or not like something" which wasn't the point at all.

The analytical mind vs. the emotional mind. We see things differently, it doesn't mean one way is superior than the other. And both sides probably need to have space to carry on their conversations undisturbed by the other sometimes. I think what may help is if we ask ourselves, are the posters in this thread looking for an emotional response or analysis? And stay out of each other's threads from time to time. For example, a thread about "Ways to fix Superstar Limo" may not be the best place to say "But I like it." And a thread about "I wanted to say how much I liked Superstar Limo" may not be the best place to list the problems with the ride.

 

Originally Posted By hopemax

>If I don't find some particular small thing to be so upsetting that I let it ruin my enjoyment,

See, here's a perfect example of my analytical vs. emotional mind at work and the reason I feel insulted some times.

Assuming that pointing something out means my fun is being ruined, is insulting to me. I need those two guys from Cranium Command, but one half of my brain is analyzing and may find potential problems, and the other completely seperate half is determining whether something is fun or not.

 

Originally Posted By Doobie

<<<
I do not feel the original comment "easy to amuse" was an insult. If it is an insult than the other end of the spectrum
saying someone is "never satisfied" or "always difficult to please" must also be taken as an insults. However those are phrases that are used repeadly in this group. In those cases, there is rarely a public response from the webmaster like the one above. And when there is it always contains the idea that people have the right to be negative here too.
>>>

I would agree, comments like that at the other end of the spectrum are insulting as well. To be fair to myself, I rarely post a message on either of this fence. I usually just let all the comments go or remove them if I feel they cross the line (which this comment didn't). But there have been a few cases where I've posted and I would guess in every case it's been from the point of view of the pro-DCA camp. That's admitedly the side of the fence I'm on. And to the extent I've let that color my attempts at acheiving my real goal - making the boards fun and fair for as many people as possible on all sides - I apologize.

Doobie.

 

Originally Posted By Park Hopper

To use JeffG’s example of the electrical parade viewing area topic. I posted that I thought Disneyland was a better venue for the Electrical Parade then DCA. I then went on to say that I will enjoy viewing the parade from a table in front of the Bakersfield Bakery. These comments were interpreted as DCA bashing. In fact, JeffG said these were sarcastic remarks with the sole purpose of bashing the park.

If that’s not being over sensitive I don’t know what is. I don’t like being accused of bashing when I don’t bash. He has accused me twice – once in that topic and again here. Sometimes I think anything negative posted about DCA is interpreted as bashing.

Saying the electrical parade works better at Disneyland then at DCA isn’t negative or positive. It is merely a comment about how well the parade fits with this park. Some of the staunchest DCA supporters believe that the Electrical Parade does not belong in DCA. And yet when I point this out, I’m DCA bashing.

You want to see a DCA bash? Look at post 22. What I wrote in the Electrical Parade Viewing area topic was not a DCA bash.

 

Originally Posted By cstephens


Again, it's a matter of perspective. "Easily amused" is a criticism, but some of us also view it as an insult, while others do not.

We're back to the "debating about debating" question again. Some people express their dislike for DCA and stick with just the park. Others condemn the park and all who enjoy it. Not just on this board, I've personally been told that I am *wrong* for liking DCA and accused of being a mindless follower and having low standards for liking DCA. On the flip side, I've also seen someone post that *everyone* should like DCA and that anyone who doesn't like DCA isn't a true Disney fan, and that's wrong as well.

We all have different opinions. No one's right.



/cs

 

Originally Posted By ComicRider

I know that DCA didn't cost as much as TDS will. I know that most of the rides in PP were bought from outside vendors, "off the shelf" as some say. There is one other thing that I know as well. I know that DCA is an entertaining experience that I enjoyed.

 

Originally Posted By Park Hopper

Well, ComicRider, that is the bottom line. If enough people enjoy the park and return often then DCA will be success.

 

Originally Posted By Doobie

Park Hopper: I'll let JeffG answer for himself, but I'll give my take on this. I just went back and reread that topic. The original post asked for the best place to watch the parade at once it starts on July 4th which I think clearly means the best place to watch it at DCA. The first reply (yours) was a joke answering Disneyland, then you gave your real answer. There were 2 or 3 other posts that then gave "anywhere but DCA" type answers. Maybe your comment wasn't a poke at DCA, just a comment on where you think the best MSEP location is. I thought it was a poke at Disneyland. I think that topic is a good example of where someone asks a sincere question about the park and receives some answers that put down the park and don't even bother to answer the question. Your post would not be an example of that, but I think the topic as a whole is and I think your post may have kicked it off (apparently inadvertantly - or maybe it would've happened anyway).

cstephens: You're right - we're debating about debating. In this case, I think it's good. I think it's helpful for everyone to be able to hear both sides in a way like this and perhaps it'll make the boards better going forward. I hope it stays at kind of a high level and doesn't go into complaining about topics of the past except where needed as examples.

Doobie.

 

Originally Posted By Park Hopper

Ahh, but Doobie, I came back later in that topic and made it clear that I meant no disrespect to DCA by my earlier comment and yet JeffG repeats his accusation in this topic.

 

Originally Posted By Park Hopper

He also accused my post of having no purpose other then to bash the park. That is clearly not the case no matter how you interpret the first part of my response.