I have a confession.... I LOVE FP+

[Dr Gevil]

For sale - panty unbunchers. Now available in FP+ or FP- mode. Hurry - before they're all gone!!!
*Pre-order shipments may take 30-60 days. PM me for details.

 

[Candleshoe]

Ok, I checked the abbreviations page and there is no FP+. ONly FP for Fast Pass. What is FP+ please?

I'm personally starting to drop the +, which made more sense when the two systems were over-lapping.
FP= Fastpass. The old system of fastpasses used paper tickets.
FP+ is the new method of FPs utilizing a database system tied to an account and retrieved via RFID from either your hard ticket or your Magic Band.

Disney's MY MAGIC PLUS system is a name for all the elements of their digitized system:
MDE (aka MDX) = My Disney Experience = the account
MM = Memory Maker = PhotopassPlus but all digital
MB = Magic Bands = a rubbery Band given to onsite guests which has rfid making it easy to pull up your MDE


IMO (and maybe ONLY in my opinion) there were three Fastpass systems
1. legacy Fastpass where you could use the tickets ANY TIME after the window opened
2. legacy Fastpass, aka FP-, where they locked the window down, this happened around 2011-ish
3. Fastpass +, aka the ONLY fastpass now, so just "fast pass".

And also since I'm busy typing at the moment, I think a lot of people compare 3 to 1, when it really should be comparing 3 to 2. IMNSHO of course

 

[Angel Ariel]

Can only speak for me, but we never did #1 - even when it was technically possible to, we always used our returns within the window. So any comparisons for me are #3-#2

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I could be wrong (planogirl, please say so if I am), but I don't think she was referring to simply following a thread you've subscribed to. I think she was more referencing searching/gathering posts from other threads that some were doing very vigorously the other day.
There does seem to be some personal issues at play between some posters, which are continually spilling over into whatever threads they join. It's certainly not everyone, but it is getting more and more frequent of late it seems.

Can't speak for everyone--

But I see this complaint on the Community boards a bit.

But what you see is stalking, isn't stalking. People just have memories of what was stated in prior threads. No dredging required.

Heck, when someone posts on the CB under a new name, I am always impressed with the number of posters who can figure out who that poster really is. They can detect it he said they are able to spot the writing style, use of words, and any other clues that confirm the association.

I don't have this ability.

But when a poster makes a claim in one thread. Then makes a counter claim in another thread -- it isn't hard to go, wait a minute and then put 2 and 2 together.

Or if a poster has a CONSISTENT opinion and shares it on any possible thread, it isn't hard to remember that. Kind of like wearing your emotions on your sleeve.



This is not stalking. It is simply paying attention and having memory recall. Some are better than others. And yeah, I might go--hmmmm, where have I heard that before. Especially when stuck in a conversation where the poster denies it.

Happens many times on these boards.

*you is general and NOT specific*
So if you are going to doing the stalking observation, it would be important to note that many of us have been observed on multiple threads of those same FP topic. If you are going to accuse others of stalking, please be sure to include yourself in the accusation.

I don't need it search to see that you have commented on many FP+ threads.

And if you are bothered by supposed stalkers, maybe it is time to review your own posting history and answer why you feel you can have a monopoly on where you post and that others should never respond lest you accuse them of stalking.

Just an observation anytime I see the "stalker" accusation floating around.

Whether someone has 10 posts or 40,000 posts--I don't think people have enough time on their hands to waste following posters around. If you feel you are indeed being stalked, you can report the individual to the moderator.

That said, I find it curious to have found so many naysayers on an I love FP+ thread--who are then accusing folks of stalking others.

 

[Candleshoe]

That said, I find it curious to have found so many naysayers on an I love FP+ thread--who are then accusing folks of stalking others.

I was so excited to see a positive thread. Then it quickly grew contentious.
I'm not saying that people need to segregate themselves into like-minded threads. I think discourse is good and sometimes people change my mind about things. Certainly a confirmation bias bubble isn't a good thing.

My point of view is this: I loved the old FP system (#1 in my list up yonder) once I learned it. Man it was great. I didn't care for it when Disney locked it down to #2, but "Their parks their rules" and I adjusted. And we had a great time. I didn't care for the whole new system when it announced. Gosh, so many things I didn't like about it. But, I am adjusting, and learning. And if I am going to Disneyworld and regardless of how frugally I plan it is still going to be expensive ... if I'm going I don't want to have a sour output before I even step through the gates!

So I'm making an effort to mentally adjust to the new system before I go.

To that end, I was happy to see a positive thread.

Thanks a lot for stinkin' it up, ya'll! .... Bless yer hearts! <j/k>

 

[rizzo0904]

To get it happy again, I also love FP+. We got to be testers back in 2013. It was great!

 

[Angel Ariel]

I didn't say I was bothered by stalking, or even that I believed it to be stalking. I was just saying I didn't think Planogirl was referring to simply replying to a thread that one was subscribed to as stalking. Simply trying to clarify what I saw as a misunderstanding, not taking sides or making accusations re: the stalking.

as for the final comment re: naysayers -
I haven't actually said anything negative about FP+ in this thread. I only responded in this thread when wisblue posted this:

wisblue said: ↑
I guess we'll just have to disagree about that.

Some posters have been so adamant about how much they like the "clean slate" and the ability to "wing it" that they give me a very strong impression that they don't like having anything scheduled in advance. They would rather just decide in the morning what park to go to and take their chances with whatever FPs they would be able to get.

If some of the regulars who are the most vocal opponents of FP+ think I have misinterpreted their comments, I invite them to say so and I will stand corrected.

I responded with how I interpreted that "clean slate" comment differently than he did - as he specifically asked for. I didn't come into this thread to bash FP+ or put it down when people love it (nor have I). I came to respond to a thought in which the person specifically invited a response. That got lost in the personal issues that are derailing this thread as a whole.

ETA: As for why I'd read this thread in the first place? The same reason I read all FP+ threads. While I may not share others' opinions on it, I am *interested* in reading why they like it (or don't like it) and what they have accomplished with it and how. I *want* to learn how to make the system work for me as best I can, as it's here to stay and my love for Disney isn't going away any time soon.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I didn't say I was bothered by stalking, or even that I believed it to be stalking. I was just saying I didn't think Planogirl was referring to simply replying to a thread that one was subscribed to as stalking. Simply trying to clarify what I saw as a misunderstanding, not taking sides or making accusations re: the stalking.

as for the final comment re: naysayers -
I haven't actually said anything negative about FP+ in this thread. I only responded in this thread when wisblue posted this:



I responded with how I interpreted that "clean slate" comment differently than he did - as he specifically asked for. I didn't come into this thread to bash FP+ or put it down when people love it (nor have I). I came to respond to a thought in which the person specifically invited a response. That got lost in the personal issues that are derailing this thread as a whole.

ETA: As for why I'd read this thread in the first place? The same reason I read all FP+ threads. While I may not share others' opinions on it, I am *interested* in reading why they like it (or don't like it) and what they have accomplished with it and how. I *want* to learn how to make the system work for me as best I can, as it's here to stay and my love for Disney isn't going away any time soon.

I know I didn't post about general you on every instance where I used the word you after my one disclaimer...

But I didn't say you, specifically, were bothered.

General observation for anyone who feels they are observing alleged "stalking". Because in 10 years, I have seen that claim many times over.

 

[Angel Ariel]

Nor did I say you did - just clarifying my statement that was quoted . I just wanted it to be clear that I wasn't making any accusations...adding a disclaimer of my own, I guess.

And regarding the comment about naysayers - it felt appropriate to point out that responses were specifically invited into this thread by someone, which could have something to do with why some of that group are here. Nothing more.

 

[SmithSmith]

I could be wrong (planogirl, please say so if I am), but I don't think she was referring to simply following a thread you've subscribed to. I think she was more referencing searching/gathering posts from other threads that some were doing very vigorously the other day.
There does seem to be some personal issues at play between some posters, which are continually spilling over into whatever threads they join. It's certainly not everyone, but it is getting more and more frequent of late it seems.

Very vigorously? Please! It was a simple search.

 

[Angel Ariel]

Very vigorously? Please! It was a simple search.

The vigorously was.more, in my head when I wrote it, thinking about the many pages of back and forth arguing, not the effort the search took.

But regardless, like I said, I wasn't saying it was or wasnt stalking - as I.clarified above.

 

[cakebaker]

That said, I find it curious to have found so many naysayers on an I love FP+ thread--who are then accusing folks of stalking others.

Strange, isn't it?

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

The vigorously was.more, in my head when I wrote it, thinking about the many pages of back and forth arguing, not the effort the search took.

But regardless, like I said, I wasn't saying it was or wasnt stalking - as I.clarified above.

This is neither here not there, so process my post as you wish...

But you backed up PG while seeking her correction if needed by, for lack of a better term/phrase--explaining what she meant without any indication you disagreed with it.

Playing Switzerland is difficult. So when you do, word choice is important.

 

[Angel Ariel]

I wasn't "backing her up" - I was explaining what my interpretation of her post was, and asking her to correct me if I was wrong. And as I said, the "very vigorous" was referencing the conversation, not the search. Was that conversation not vigorous? Was it not a very intense back and forth?

Let me assure you, all word choice aside, there was no *intent* on my part to take sides or make accusations. I don't know how I can be more clear than that.

ETA: Regarding the "without any indication you disagreed with it" - well, isn't that what Switzerland is? Not taking sides? Indicating disagreement would be taking a side and no longer being neutral then, wouldn't it? I was specifically trying to avoid both agreeing and disagreeing for that very reason.

 

[SmithSmith]

The vigorously was.more, in my head when I wrote it, thinking about the many pages of back and forth arguing, not the effort the search took.

Really?

I think she was more referencing searching/gathering posts from other threads that some were doing very vigorously the other day.

You clearly meant the search/gather was vigourous, since there is no mention of the ensuing conversation.

For someone so critical of other posters phrasings and word choice, you certainly are lax with yours...

 

[JoshuaShaw]

 

[cakebaker]

I could be wrong (planogirl, please say so if I am), but I don't think she was referring to simply following a thread you've subscribed to. I think she was more referencing searching/gathering posts from other threads that some were doing very vigorously the other day.
There does seem to be some personal issues at play between some posters, which are continually spilling over into whatever threads they join. It's certainly not everyone, but it is getting more and more frequent of late it seems.

And neither was I. Simply because you post multiple times to the same person, or recall things that let you know someone is posting inconsistent statements, or happen to run onto an old thread where you discovered they were being misleading or inconsistent, that doesn't equate to stalking. I understood exactly what she was saying, I really didn't need clarification.

 

[Angel Ariel]

Really?



You clearly meant the search/gather was vigourous, since there is no mention of the ensuing conversation.

For someone so critical of other posters phrasings and word choice, you certainly are lax with yours...

And I have since clarified that that was *not* what I meant. I'm sorry it came across that way.

Yes, I was lax with that wording, which is why I clarified. I was on my way to put my daughter down for a nap and trying to get the post off quickly. My mistake, for which I am sorry.

 

[Angel Ariel]

And neither was I. Simply because you post multiple times to the same person, or recall things that let you know someone is posting inconsistent statements, or happen to run onto an old thread where you discovered they were being misleading or inconsistent, that doesn't equate to stalking. I understood exactly what she was saying, I really didn't need clarification.

Then I'm sorry. This (the bolded below) is the only reason I responded to that at all

I agree except I saw no stalking on that thread- there were people who agreed with the op who posted just as frequently. It's not stalking because you disagree, disagree repeatedly or have others who happen to agree with you posting.

I think this stalking business is way overblown. There's a follow thread option on these boards- I don't use it, but I guess if I did, I'd be stalking- otherwise known as following a thread.

Clearly in reading through the thread quickly, I missed something. I'm honestly sorry. There was *never* any intent on my part to make accusations, and I'm sorry that it came across that I was.

 

[Robo]

Sorry, I've been out all day re-parking my car.

Did I miss anything?