Ultimate Stupid Guest

[PapaMouse]

From page 5 of this article HERE.

As I leave the park, I decide that after all my cranky complaining, I'm glad my week came to an end this way. "It's a Small World" makes for a nice, pleasant memory to finish on. I'm feeling positive about Disney again. And then there's an incident on the parking tram.

I'm seated on the tram, ready to ride back out to the parking lot where my rental car's waiting. The driver has already blown the horn and announced that no more boarding will be allowed. Suddenly, I notice a woman 20 yards away, running toward us.

The driver spots her too. The tram is in motion now, and he screams over the loudspeaker: "Ma'am! Stand back! There is no more boarding!" But the woman can see that there's no real danger here—the vehicle is moving at, like, 3 miles an hour—and fer crissakes she doesn't want to wait 15 minutes for another tram if she doesn't have to.

The driver keeps shouting. The other passengers are tut-tutting at this rule-breaker. The tram keeps rolling. The woman is getting nearer.

As I watch all this, I start to think about the totalitarian seamlessness of Disney. The berms that hide the loading docks and the Dumpsters. The fireworks that go off every night at precisely 9 p.m. The impeccably G-rated entertainment. The synchronized rides. The power-washed streets.

"Ma'am!" the driver yells again, with real exasperation. She's just a few strides away, with her eyes on that slow-moving prize. "Ma'am, there is no more boarding at this time!"

I can't help but break into a satisfied grin as the woman hops up on the running board and takes a seat.

You can read the entire article if you wish, this guy is really a dink.

[Bochocho]

I read that series when it came out.
The guy really is a dink.
He had the whole thing written before he even got there, I'm convinced.
I don't need the guy to revel in the place, but he was predictable, lazy and unnecessarily sarcastic and mean.
It ended up reading like some 16-year-old's blog, and I expected much better. (I apologize to any 16-year-olds with blogs, by the way. You could do better than this prick did.)

Again, it's not so much he didn't love Disney. That's fine - some people will and some won't. He was condesdcending and he came off trying to appear like a hipster/rebel. Instead he looks like a jerk with little inclination to put some work into his writing.

[Shorty82]

That guy went into WDW with preconceived ideas about the place and didn't let anything change them. He was mostly concentrating on the superficial aspects of the parks instead of in the details of them.

His comments about the DVC show he didn't actually go up to any of the booths or he would know that there are DVC destinations around the world, not just at WDW.

[GRUMPY PIRATE]

I read the article and come away with the impression that he might have read a lot of other articles and/or discussion boards, some of the stuff just dosn't seem right.

[Big Wallaby]

This writer is no different than the professors who go to Disney parks for the express reasons of analyzing it (not a bad thing in and of itself) and wanting to see everything as bad.

I can't help but break into a satisfied grin as the woman hops up on the running board and takes a seat.

And what if she had fallen, been run over, and injured or killed? Would he still have smiled?

[GRUMPY PIRATE]

This writer is no different than the professors who go to Disney parks for the express reasons of analyzing it (not a bad thing in and of itself) and wanting to see everything as bad.



And what if she had fallen, been run over, and injured or killed? Would he still have smiled?

No, you are right. You either like WDW and DLR, or you don't. Its obvious the writer had pre-concieved ideas about the place before he went. He probably started writing the article, then waited to finish it with some examples while he was there.

That too bad, because somone (and their family) might miss out on a great vacation at WDW simply because they read the article(s) and decided to go somewhere else.

[kurtisnelson]

And what if she had fallen, been run over, and injured or killed? Would he still have smiled?

Maybe its the parent of your favorite safari squealing child...

[Theme Park Where]

If you read on in the article, the Slate was quite slammed with discussion about the article. The Slate, being edgy and pretentious, wrote about how silly it was that people felt that strongly about the article to write defending Disney. The feel I got from their discussion of the discussion (now THATS confusing) was that anyone who disagreed with the article was somwhow brainwashed by Disney and proved the article's point. I love circular thinking like that!

[EeyoresButterfly]

After readin the excerpt I have no desire to read the entire article as it will just annoy me. I really don't like people have to be very negative all the time. I loved that in the excerpt the things he listed as being bad are things that not only are we normally praised for, but are necessary for safety. I'm sure that if that woman had fallen and gotten run over or broken something he would be criticizing Disney for not stopping the tram. (Why didn't they stop the tram when she crossed the yellow line?)

[GRUMPY PIRATE]

After readin the excerpt I have no desire to read the entire article as it will just annoy me. I really don't like people have to be very negative all the time. I loved that in the excerpt the things he listed as being bad are things that not only are we normally praised for, but are necessary for safety. I'm sure that if that woman had fallen and gotten run over or broken something he would be criticizing Disney for not stopping the tram. (Why didn't they stop the tram when she crossed the yellow line?)

We should look on articles like that in a positive way, in regards to SGT!

If enough people read that article, and even if only a few believe that you can ignore rules, then there will be a LOT more SG stories posted here!!