Paying OOP for kids on the free dining plan.

[Pedler]

I'm not looking for validation at all! I couldn't care less about your opinions, as I stated very clearly in my opening post. I simply asked if it was still being ALLOWED. And apparantly, at least at the moment, it IS.

And please tell me how doing something that is ALLOWED is "getting away with something"? You only "get away with" things that are NOT allowed!

Then could you answer this question? Is it OK to lie about a 10 year olds age, say they are 9, to pay less for park admission seeing as no one checks the kids ages and you could do this without problem.

And you still haven't addressed the question about how you square your definition of allowed with the rules defined in the brochure. Do you think they put that rule there just for kicks and grins?

 

[msmayor]

And please tell me how doing something that is ALLOWED is "getting away with something"? You only "get away with" things that are NOT allowed!

That's just it though...its NOT allowed per the writing in the brochure. The fact that an occasional CM allows it to occure does NOT mean Disney allows it.

My family had the free dining last year...but both my kids were classified as adults (11 and 14). It made life simple, as every single credit was adult.

I remember last year, when they lowered the age that one was considered a child for dining plan purposes, from 10 to 9. Smart move on Disney, as far as I'm concerned. Make more of the kids pay the adult price, and the abuse goes down.

 

[Pedler]

No she wouldn't. She would still get slammed by the self-appointed Disney Dining Plan Morality Police.

OP: I sent you a PM .

I think there would be a lot less posts and less debate on the facts. I for one dont' really care if someone wants to break the rules, lie about kids ages and reuse refillable mugs. If that's the way they want to live thier life then that is fine.

However there are people that truly want to follow the rules and there are some unclear areas at Disney. When the OP starts denying that this is against the rules and saying it is allowed and implies that Disney is OK with this it muddies the waters for those that want to follow the rules and save money at the same time. The OP should just admit what they want to do and be done with it. I for one would respect that a lot more than the denial about what she wants to do.

 

[Frantasmic]

I like the changing use of *allowed* to ALLOWED.

It is ALLOWED, i.e., unenforced, until Disney separates credits. That is simply the answer you are looking for.

If it is ALLOWED, then announce your intentions at each place you pay for your children OOP. State precisely that you are banking your kids credits, because it is a pool of credits after all, for adult use later on at signature TS meals.

If it really is ALLOWED, then you wouldn't have any objection to stating your intent at each meal.

 

[MissD]

And please tell me how doing something that is ALLOWED is "getting away with something"? You only "get away with" things that are NOT allowed!

You've made it quite clear that my opinion doesn't matter to you...but then you went and asked me a question.

I guess it's semantics and your interpretation of the word allowed.
You've chosen your interpretation to justify what you want to do. That said, what you want to do is prohibited and NOT ALLOWED. I've lost count of how many people have quoted you chapter and verse on that.

Were you be able to do it anyway-for whatever reason-it is still not permitted or acceptable. Being able to do something regardless of the rules against it does not make it right, period.

The problem is that Disney counted a little bit too much on integrity.

 

[3PRINCESSMOM]

they changed that rule in the brochure just to appease the "self-appointed Disney Dining Plan Morailty Police."

I do not know what is "right" or "wrong" with regard to the DDP for me and my family, so I certainly am in no position to give advice. However, what consistently boggles my mind is how adamant those of you are about what is morally right and ethical, but how mean spirited some of those posts are. I guess I am bewildered by folks "screaming" about lying and cheating, all the while they are, basically, name-calling and passing judgement.

If you know what is "right" consider yourself lucky to have the wisdom and clarity, and just hope that the rest of us see the light the way you have.

 

[robinb]

As opposed to the self-appointed Disney Dining Plan Immorality Brigade -- the self-proclaimed "pirates"? Are you really complaining about honor, in defense of dishonor?

I sure hope you can see the problem with your line of reasoning.

There is no problem with my reasoning. I am a "Live and Let Live" and "Follow Your Own Moral Compass" kind of person when it comes to the hot button issues here: mug refills, room stuffing, sneaking in 3 year olds and dining credit pooling. I personally don't care what other people do and it is not my place to tell them they are wrong or immoral. Or call them pirates or insinuate they are bad parents.

 

[bicker]

I like the changing use of *allowed* to ALLOWED. It is ALLOWED, i.e., unenforced, until Disney separates credits....

I think making up new definitions for words by changing their typecase won't do it. "Allowed" does not mean "unenforced" -- "unenforced" means "unenforced".

If it really is [unenforced], then you wouldn't have any objection to stating your intent at each meal.

That would go far in establishing a measure of honor, but not far enough IMHO. It puts the CMs in the difficult position of having an unreasonable expectation placed on them (that they'll allow you to commit a bald-faced violation to the terms and conditions).

 

[bicker]

There is no problem with my reasoning. I am a "Live and Let Live" and "Follow Your Own Moral Compass" kind of person when it comes to the hot button issues here:

I'm very tolerant of different moral belief systems. If you can point out a generally-accepted moral belief system that supports such deception, I'll be glad to reconsider my position.

 

[BRERALEX]

 

[BillSears]

And please tell me how doing something that is ALLOWED is "getting away with something"? You only "get away with" things that are NOT allowed!

The rules state that it is not allowed. Just because you can get way with doing something doesn't mean it's allowed. I could shoplift from Walmart and they won't prosecute if the amount is under $15.00 but just because I got away without being put in jail doesn't mean it's allowed to steal.

 

[Pedler]

There is no problem with my reasoning. I am a "Live and Let Live" and "Follow Your Own Moral Compass" kind of person when it comes to the hot button issues here: mug refills, room stuffing, sneaking in 3 year olds and dining credit pooling. I personally don't care what other people do and it is not my place to tell them they are wrong or immoral. Or call them pirates or insinuate they are bad parents.

robinb,

I generally agree with you that is why I don't get into the mug debates or the whole kids age thing. I also don't think I have called the OP immoral or unethical or insinuated that they are bad parents. My issue is that unlike the kids ages or mug debates where most people freely admit that they are breaking the rules to save money the OP feels that she is operating within the rules. This causes confusion for those that want to follow the rules while at the same time maximize their savings. If the OP just address how she reconciles what she wants to do with the rules as stated in the brochure I would be OK with that or just admit that she wants to break the rules to save some money I am OK with that as well. I am not going to get into the whole morality thing. But I do feel strongly that she shouldn't try to rationalize what she wants to do as being somehow within the rules when it clearly is stated in the brochure as something that isn't allowed regardless of the lax enforcement.

 

[MissD]

they changed that rule in the brochure just to appease the "self-appointed Disney Dining Plan Morailty Police."

I do not know what is "right" or "wrong" with regard to the DDP for me and my family, so I certainly am in no position to give advice. However, what consistently boggles my mind is how adamant those of you are about what is morally right and ethical, but how mean spirited some of those posts are. I guess I am bewildered by folks "screaming" about lying and cheating, all the while they are, basically, name-calling and passing judgement.

If you know what is "right" consider yourself lucky to have the wisdom and clarity, and just hope that the rest of us see the light the way you have.

For the record, I am not a self-appointed Disney Dining Plan Morality Police Officer.

We will be trying to the DDP (through DVC so not free dining) for our first time this weekend, and as such have spent a great deal of time poring over the materials--because they can be confusing about some of the options. That said, the rules are both clear and specific on the issue the OP asked about.

I do have a hard time when people post trying to make sure they can still do something that the plan prohibits, i.e., whether the rules as written will be actually be enforced. My opinions have far less to do with the DDP and more with the concept in general. We're actually talking about the hopes of inconsistent enforcement of a prohibited action. The reality is that, in the end, it costs everyone for the actions of a few.

As a parent, I know what I do speaks far louder than what I say. I don't want my son to believe the rules don't matter as long as you don't get caught. Maybe that's just me-so be it.


I may be wrong, but referring to some people as 'self-appointed Disney Dining Plan Morality Police' is name-calling and judgmental as well.

 

[robinb]

I'm very tolerant of different moral belief systems. If you can point out a generally-accepted moral belief system that supports such deception, I'll be glad to reconsider my position.

I'm not asking you to reconsider your position that you wouldn't pool dining credits. That's a-okay with me. I will not be pooling credits when I go next month and like the OP I don't care if anyone here agrees with me or not.

 

[Lewisc]

they changed that rule in the brochure just to appease the "self-appointed Disney Dining Plan Morailty Police."

No, Disney changed the brochure (and the plan rules) because too many guests were being greedy (or smart consumers) by using credits that were priced at the child level to purchase adult meals.

Disney doesn't really care what either the meal pirates or what the "morality police" say on internet boards. More people were using a plan feature/loophole then Disney anticipated so the brochure and the plan were changed.

 

[bicker]

I also don't think I have called the OP immoral or unethical or insinuated that they are bad parents.

This is a very important point. Doing something wrong doesn't make someone immoral. Labeling a person immoral requires more than a few, isolated transgressive behaviors. If all you do wrong in your life is cheat with the Dining Plan, then you're probably eligible for sainthood.

My issue is that unlike the kids ages or mug debates where most people freely admit that they are breaking the rules to save money the OP feels that she is operating within the rules.

I have to admit that if the self-proclaimed "pirates" would state, "I know this is wrong, but I do it anyway because I'm selfish/more important than others/etc.," and would refrain from advocating that anyone share in their transgressions, I'd have very little to say about this.

 

[bicker]

I'm not asking you to reconsider your position that you wouldn't pool dining credits.

I would never reconsider my position about what I would do. What I meant is that I would reconsider my position with regard to others doing it.

 

[robinb]

My issue is that unlike the kids ages or mug debates where most people freely admit that they are breaking the rules to save money the OP feels that she is operating within the rules. This causes confusion for those that want to follow the rules while at the same time maximize their savings. If the OP just address how she reconciles what she wants to do with the rules as stated in the brochure I would be OK with that or just admit that she wants to break the rules to save some money I am OK with that as well. I am not going to get into the whole morality thing. But I do feel strongly that she shouldn't try to rationalize what she wants to do as being somehow within the rules when it clearly is stated in the brochure as something that isn't allowed regardless of the lax enforcement.

Ah! I see your point now. Yes, I feel the same way. I personally don't care what people do. However, I would like them to (1) own up to what they are doing at least to themselves and (2) understand the possible consequences of their actions. Your extra kid will have to sleep on the floor and won't be able to get into the EMHs. A CM may tell you that you can't use your mug that has already been re-designed twice. The gate CM may ask your 3 year old how old he is and you may have to purchase a more expensive ticket at the gate. The CM at a restaurant may require that everyone use credits at a restaurant and not allow you to pay for your kids OOP.

My original comment to you was that it doesn't matter these days if the poster is trying to maximize the dining plan inside the rules or outside the rules. The response by some posters (whom I admire on most topics) will always be the same. We all have our hot button, knee jerk issues and this is one of them for some folks.

 

[robinb]

I may be wrong, but referring to some people as 'self-appointed Disney Dining Plan Morality Police' is name-calling and judgmental as well.

No, you're right. I apologize for using that term.

 

[crisi]

Can I go 70mph in a 60mph zone on the freeway?

No, its illegal. I do it all the time, however, and generally, I don't get caught. When I do get caught, I have to pay the ticket and get the insurance hit.

Will I get caught if I speed on the freeway?

I don't know....I don't know if I'll get caught this afternoon going home, so I really can't speak to your situation. And while I know because I drive the same route ever day which bridges the cops sit under, I can't speak for where you live. Plus, I know a cop or two, so sometimes I don't get a ticket - I'm also cute, female, with a large chest....you may be lacking these advantages in ticket evasion.

I also know, cause I know someone in the government, that they are asking the troopers to do more ticketing due to some budget shortfalls - so I don't expect next time I'll get away with batting my eyes with "Gee, officier, I was going THAT fast?!" And I'm getting older, cute's not going to keep working for me either. Maybe I'll start slowing down.

I've heard that if you bother, you can fight the ticket and get away with it more often than not anyway.

Is is right and moral to speed. Not going to judge.