Just because it’s not against the rules doesn’t make it right

[tasha99]

-snip-

Does that absolve me for my TIW FP transgression?

My child, I need to hear more about this "transgression" and how you were able to achieve a fast pass using TIW. Then I'll know how, errrrr I mean if . . .

 

[DisneyKidds]

Sorry, that was a loophole long, long ago, in a WDW Galaxy far, far away, that was quickly closed, back in the day when FP machines existed......

 

[DisneyKidds]

I'm so naïve I don't even know what any of these theoretical loopholes are! Usually "beating the system" is so much work it's not worth the payoff.

Agreed. I've got MBs out the wazoo, taking over my home like Tribbles (nerd alert).....that I probably could have finagled a truck load of day of FP+ on our last trip.....but it wasn't worth the effort!

 

[g8torphan]

I dont understand why it is permitted on the boards to push these loopholes to people looking for advice on planning a trip.

Referals arent allowed on the other boards here at DIS, just seems weird that Pete and the gang are against that, but in favor of something like this.

Their silence legitimizes a very suspect manuever IMO.

Their board their rules I guess....

 

[lmcarr49]

And I bet most of you that are agreeing with the OP are using loopholes on your taxes.

I have never seen so many people bent out of shape over a Disney loophole. Lol!

 

[yooperfan]

Wow, sounds like a lot of people got caught with their hand in the cookie jar, so to speak. What's with all the snarky remarks? You can tell by the careful wording the OP did not intend to attack anyone, yet it is obvious it is okay to attack the OP. We hear all the time how much everyone hate certain behavior in the parks but that's okay. I find some of the responses disturbingly mean spirited so I will now move on.....

 

[L&Lfan]

I feel really stupid (or naive) that I don't understand what any of this thread means! Obviously I don't know about any WDW loopholes.

 

[mshanson3121]

Wow, sounds like a lot of people got caught with their hand in the cookie jar, so to speak. What's with all the snarky remarks? You can tell by the careful wording the OP did not intend to attack anyone, yet it is obvious it is okay to attack the OP. We hear all the time how much everyone hate certain behavior in the parks but that's okay. I find some of the responses disturbingly mean spirited so I will now move on.....

If she didn't mean to attack or offend anyone, then she shouldn't have posted. Simple. You'd have to be pretty naive not to realize that this will offend people, given the HUGE popularity of two recent "loophole" threads. Carefully worded or not, she came off as very sanctimonious. And, for that matter, it has already been stated that the "ethics" of those loopholes is NOT to be discussed, has it not?

 

[MolonLabe]

I think the whole "loophole" thing is a comment more on society than just Disney.

It is the difference between the "Spirit of the law" and the "Letter of the law".

For example, speed limits were set to protect people from dangerous drivers and police officers used a lot of discretion in writing tickets when they were first established.

20 years ago, let alone 40 years ago, you'd never find a cop who'd write a ticket for someone doing 55 in a 45 when that person was rushing their wife to the hospital to have a baby.

Today we routinely see cops not just writing tickets for that, but not even allowing the husband to drive the 2 more miles to the hospital and then write the husband a ticket while his wife stumbles into the ER.

Beyond that, I see a lot of hypocrites in this thread and a gross distortion of the word "loop hole" generally used.

Let's stick to the driving thing, the PEW foundation as well as UCLA did studies showing the average driver commits 3 crimes (on accident and usually unknowingly) during a 10 mile round trip drive to their local super market.

Assuming everyone in this thread has driven a car at least 10 miles in the USA, there isn't a single person in this thread who isn't a criminal so let's try and keep things in perspective.

FWIW I have no idea what specific loophole the 'OP' was referring too, but my sentiments cover just about every one I could think of but as someone with a family of 5 who's last two trips were 7 and 8 days at CR with a TPV and deluxe dining, I'm well accustomed to spending 10k on a WDW vacation unfortunately.

 

[StatlerNotWaldorf]

If she didn't mean to attack or offend anyone, then she shouldn't have posted. Simple. You'd have to be pretty naive not to realize that this will offend people, given the HUGE popularity of two recent "loophole" threads. Carefully worded or not, she came off as very sanctimonious. And, for that matter, it has already been stated that the "ethics" of those loopholes is NOT to be discussed, has it not?

He not she but that is neither here nor there. Did I mean for it to spark conversation. Yes. Should I be posting things that do not spark conversation. Assuming you know what was my intention when I posted it is pretty naive. If people are fine with the choices they made then why would an opposing viewpoint be offensive or threatening to them? I wasn't offended by the numerous personal attacks made in this thread towards me.

I have learned from this that I need be more thoughtful on what I post. I feel bad if I really offended anyone.

I am also sorry if the ethics of this is something we have been asked not to discuss. I did not read the HUGE threads on loopholes as I don't read threads that don't interest me and clearly I am not interested in utilizing loopholes.

It's sad that the default assumption is that this we me trying to cause trouble. I own my part of that I guess for for the original post but maybe the fact that it lead to immediate attacks rather then questions to seek intent or understanding is also of concern.

In the end if I could have deleted this post I would have. I looked. I come to these boards to feed my love of Disney and this has done the opposite. If you were offended by what I posted then I sincerely apologize. If you just lashed out b/c that's who you are then there will be nothing I can do about that.

Either way have a great night all.

 

[mshanson3121]

He not she but that is neither here nor there. Did I mean for it to spark conversation. Yes. Should I be posting things that do not spark conversation. Assuming you know what was my intention when I posted it is pretty naive. If people are fine with the choices they made then why would an opposing viewpoint be offensive or threatening to them? I wasn't offended by the numerous personal attacks made in this thread towards me.

I have learned from this that I need be more thoughtful on what I post. I feel bad if I really offended anyone.

I am also sorry if the ethics of this is something we have been asked not to discuss. I did not read the HUGE threads on loopholes as I don't read threads that don't interest me and clearly I am not interested in utilizing loopholes.

It's sad that the default assumption is that this we me trying to cause trouble. I own my part of that I guess for for the original post but maybe the fact that it lead to immediate attacks rather then questions to seek intent or understanding is also of concern.

In the end if I could have deleted this post I would have. I looked. I come to these boards to feed my love of Disney and this has done the opposite. If you were offended by what I posted then I sincerely apologize. If you just lashed out b/c that's who you are then there will be nothing I can do about that.

Either way have a great night all.

Ah. But you assume wrong. Because not once did I even remotely allude to the idea that I knew what your intent was when you posted. All I said was you should have known that it would offend people. That's not even close to being the same thing as saying, "I know why you did this!! And it was to start a debate!!" Though it's amusing that you yourself just admitted to the fact that you posted this to spark "conversation".

And just for the record - no, I'm not using one of those "loopholes". But I can tell you that as a mother of a sick child, who comes from a single income household who is struggling to provide a once in a lifetime trip on a fraction of the budget you get to do repeatedly who considered them, as a friend to a woman who has a 5 year old daughter with cancer who has used them, yeah, I can totally get why people would use those perfectly permissible loopholes, to do everything in their power to give their child that one and only experience. And yes, there are some who use the loopholes who really don't need to, they just choose to. But there are people using them, that for reasons unknown to you - need to. And to have someone turn around and rub it in their face how wrong it is, and how you're happy you took the higher road... surely you can see how that wouldn't exactly sit well. Because at the end of the day, who are you to judge? As I said before - you have NO idea what goes on behind someone's decision. Perhaps just think before you make sweeping judgements next time.

 

[StatlerNotWaldorf]

And who are you to judge that?

A fair point. I have already apologized if I offended anyone and I meant it. If I offended you then that includes you.

 

[mshanson3121]

A fair point. I have already apologized if I offended anyone and I meant it. If I offended you then that includes you.

I amended my comment somewhat, as I read your earlier apology. That's fine. I tried to message you but couldn't.

On a completely different note... you and I live in the same province, lol. Where are you located?

 

[Magpie]

Oh, Magpie.....not even 12 items.....and a lil' ole pack of gum?

I don't think there is anyone out there that doesn't bend SOME rule, SOMEWHERE.....is all I'm sayin'.

I do like the OPs sense of moral compass, but ain't nobody perfect, and coming here to condemn, albeit in the nicest of ways, isn't going to change that in anybody, the OP included. That's why I don't get too hung up on the loopholes.

Of course, that may be because I was an immoral TIW FP stealing sob.....

Nope, because at least one of the ladies likes to make a joke out of counting my items.

However, I have been known to jaywalk on occasion. So yes, I've bent or broken many rules in my life, some of which I'm pretty proud of myself for.

I just try not to break the rules in ways that hurt or even just inconvenience other people, like stiffing the waitress on a tip or holding up the line in the supermarket. I mean, if everyone broke the 12 item limit, it wouldn't be an express line any more, would it? It'd just be a regular line.

But I'm with you on not getting hung up over what other people do. As long as they aren't letting 12 people into the line in front of me and making me wait for the next bus, I really don't care what they do. I have faith in Disney's ability to put a stop to it, the moment their shenanigans get out of hand and begin impacting other guest's experiences and/or their bottom line. I was just getting pedantic about your choice of examples, not disagreeing with you, per se.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

And, for that matter, it has already been stated that the "ethics" of those loopholes is NOT to be discussed, has it not?

If that were the case, I suspect the thread would have been closed rather than relocated.

The prohibition you speak of that would cover this thread are limited to the thread where the warning appears.

 

[SmithSmith]

Let's stick to the driving thing, the PEW foundation as well as UCLA did studies showing the average driver commits 3 crimes (on accident and usually unknowingly) during a 10 mile round trip drive to their local super market.

Assuming everyone in this thread has driven a car at least 10 miles in the USA, there isn't a single person in this thread who isn't a criminal so let's try and keep things in perspective.

FWIW I have no idea what specific loophole the 'OP' was referring too, but my sentiments cover just about every one I could think of but as someone with a family of 5 who's last two trips were 7 and 8 days at CR with a TPV and deluxe dining, I'm well accustomed to spending 10k on a WDW vacation unfortunately.

See bolded above.

Those are the key words. Your analogy is illogical. No one is exploiting a "loophole" on accident, they're doing so intentionally.

 

[alvernon90]

If you were offended by what I posted then I sincerely apologize. If you just lashed out b/c that's who you are then there will be nothing I can do about that.

I guess I would count as someone who lashes out because that's who I am. It's kinda my thing.

As to the substance of your position, I do understand where you are coming from. I think the backlash comes from the sense that you were telling people who "exploit" the "loophole" that they are wrong and acting badly. But this isn't a controversy like line jumping, pool hopping, or reusing mugs. Those things are explicitly against Disney policy and/or the law. A "loophole" is really just another way of saying that people on the boards have learned to take maximum advantage of the rules as they exist -- Disney knows this happens and choose to allow it rather than put a stop to it (as they finally did with the mugs, the ticket resellers, etc).

You think that people should use the system as advertised and that people who are in the know because they travel frequently and/or haunt these boards should not have an advantage over casual visitors. Many DISers believe that using Disney's systems as advertised is a recipe for disaster, which is why they come here to learn how to squeeze the most value out of their vacation dollars. Sometimes people advocate taking steps that are clearly against policy, or even count as stealing, and those debates are one thing. But when people are simply doing something that Disney allows them to do, they won't like it if you equate their "loophole exploitation" with actual violations of policy. This is more like debating whether you should sit or stand at the curbs during parades. Strong feelings are just that, feelings, and not a basis for normative statements.

I respect your stance. I wouldn't call you a chump or an idiot for choosing not to take advantage of the "loophole." It seems you understand that some of us felt you took that kind of tone in your original post, and you understand why that would make us a little touchy. I accept your apology, I hope you will accept mine, and I hope this post is more in line with the kind of discussion you had hoped to kick off.

 

[DisneyKidds]

But I can tell you that as a mother of a sick child, who comes from a single income household who is struggling to provide a once in a lifetime trip on a fraction of the budget you get to do repeatedly who considered them, as a friend to a woman who has a 5 year old daughter with cancer who has used them, yeah, I can totally get why people would use those perfectly permissible loopholes, to do everything in their power to give their child that one and only experience.......But there are people using them, that for reasons unknown to you - need to. And to have someone turn around and rub it in their face how wrong it is, and how you're happy you took the higher road... surely you can see how that wouldn't exactly sit well.

Need to? The above justification is no different than my brother, who was out of work for a couple of months, stiffing the waitress a couple bucks (only leaving a 10% tip) in the bar on his ski vacation. He was only doing what he "NEEDed to do to survive".

Ummm, no. Really, I feel for people on a budget, or a family with a sick child (insert dozens of other less than ideal circumstances I can empathize with)......but NEED to use a loophole that, while isn't "prohibited", is arguably against the spirit and intent of the rules/system? Again, no.

We're pretty much just talking about getting early/extra access to FP+. Nobody NEEDS that. Yeah, people do it. Not me, and I don't get my undies in a bunch because others do. But what's worse than people doing it is some of the justifications people throw out there for why it is ok.

No need for the OP to apologize for offending anyone, because the only ones offended are the people that did something they could, but perhaps feel on some level that they probably shouldn't have.

Again, I don't care if people do it or not. Everyone has their unique view, everyone makes their own choices. If comfortable with their choices there is no need to be offended. Loophole away! Just don't justify it as someone "needing" to do it.

 

[quandrea]

Need to? The above justification is no different than my brother, who was out of work for a couple of months, stiffing the waitress a couple bucks (only leaving a 10% tip) in the bar on his ski vacation. He was only doing what he "NEEDed to do to survive".

Ummm, no. Really, I feel for people on a budget, or a family with a sick child (insert dozens of other less than ideal circumstances I can empathize with)......but NEED to use a loophole that, while isn't "prohibited", is arguably against the spirit and intent of the rules/system? Again, no.

We're pretty much just talking about getting early/extra access to FP+. Nobody NEEDS that. Yeah, people do it. Not me, and I don't get my undies in a bunch because others do. But what's worse than people doing it is some of the justifications people throw out there for why it is ok.

No need for the OP to apologize for offending anyone, because the only ones offended are the people that did something they could, but perhaps feel on some level that they probably shouldn't have.

Again, I don't care if people do it or not. Everyone has their unique view, everyone makes their own choices. If comfortable with their choices there is no need to be offended. Loophole away! Just don't justify it as someone "needing" to do it.

Spot on. Wrong is wrong, no matter how one tries to dress it up and take it out. The mere fact of justifying one's act proves the act was less than above board. I think people need to put things in perspective--it's a theme park--not riding the mine train an extra time won't be the end of life as we know it.

 

[mshanson3121]

Spot on. Wrong is wrong, no matter how one tries to dress it up and take it out. The mere fact of justifying one's act proves the act was less than above board. I think people need to put things in perspective--it's a theme park--not riding the mine train an extra time won't be the end of life as we know it.

Yeah, except the difference is wrong is just YOUR opinion. Because Disney has deemed it's not wrong. They know about many of these, and allow them. In fact, the CMs will themselves tell you about them, or talk to you about the loopholes. So just because YOU think it's wrong, doesn't mean it is. And Disney apparently agrees that it isn't. If they were that bothered by them,and felt they were losing money, or hurting others,they WOULD put a stop to it, as they have other loopholes in the past.

But regardless, it must be nice to live in such a bubble where you can judge the decisions of others, especially in the situations I mentioned. You're a hypocrite if you think for one second that you wouldn't do everything in your power to grant your dying child's wish. Especially if that meant using a loophole that is not breaking any rules. And even if you wouldn't, that's great, but quite frankly, it's a pretty cold-hearted jerk that would judge those that do.