Why "News & Rumors" is needed for debate.....

[DisneyKidds]

I lifted this from a post of mine on the Resorts Board.......

I LOVED the theming of the resort, it was Disney in it's truest fashion. I really loved the color of our building, it was purple and made me smile each time I walked to our room.

Again, I LOVED the theming @ POP. After staying deluxe, granted the rooms are bigger, but they didn't feel "Disneyfied" POP was cheery "Groovy" and a fun place to stay.

Glad you enjoyed your stay and have found your new preferred accomodations for future trips. The Value resorts do give you a great way to stay on site at a very reasonable cost.

That being said, you and I sure do have a vastly different opinion as to what makes for true Disney theming in a resort. "Disneyfied" may indeed be bold colored buildings, cheerily decorated in iconic fashion. Of course my idea of Disney theming in it's truest sense is the likes of a stay at the Polynesian where I am immersed in the lush tropical islands of Polynesia and my hotel is an extension of Adventureland in the MK, or a stay at Port Orleans Riverside (Dixie Landings as I still like to call it) where I am swept away to the Old South as I stroll by the elegant mansions or wander around the residences on the bayou.

Not trying to get down on you for your opinion of what truely makes for a "Disney" hotel, just relaying my concept of what that means for comaprison purposes . Disney does have something for everyone.........

We who love what Disney used to, and still can, be have a duty to not let the idea that POP represents all that is Disney hotel theming in it's truest sense be perpetuated .

Really, now that may seem critical, but perhaps viewing the way we discuss things around here in this context can help lumpalumpa better understand the need for critical analysis.

Any thoughts?

 

[Lumpalump]

Let me preface this posting with the following....

THIS WILL BE THE LAST TIME I POST ANYTHING ON THIS BOARD!!!!!!

Thanks for the update on why "News & Rumors" is needed for debate...it truley clarifies it for me..

Basically..unless you completely agree with all the regular cast of characters on this board then you should go shove a stick up your *****. Because your opinion won't mean a thing.


GOODBYE!!!!!!!

 

[DancingBear]

Basically..unless you completely agree with all the regular cast of characters on this board then you should go shove a stick up your *****. Because your opinion won't mean a thing.

If that were true, then we wouldn't actually be having any debates, would we? I have had many vigorous disagreements with the regular denizens of this board. Your opinions may be tested, but you are certainly welcome to post them.

Which brings me to the question which I posted to you on the other thread, which you are apparently choosing not to answer (rather than engaging in discussion)--why is your proposal of having this board be a jumping off point for flights of fancy any more valid than what it actually is?

 

[YoHo]

Basically..unless you completely agree with all the regular cast of characters on this board then you should go shove a stick up your *****. Because your opinion won't mean a thing.

Somebody clearly hasn't actually read a signle thread here.

 

[DisneyKidds]

THIS WILL BE THE LAST TIME I POST ANYTHING ON THIS BOARD!!!!!!

Well, that certainly isn't the outcome I was hoping for.

Sorry you feel that way Lumpa. BTW, if you disagree with me as to what Disney should strive for in terms of theming for it's hotels, and whether POP embodies all of whatever you think that is, perhaps you should outline you opinions in a well constructed post that would spark further discussion. That is the type of discussion that used to be most interesting on this board, IMHO. If you think POP is the best model for Disney hotels going forward then convince me of why. I have my opinions, but my mind is always open.

Oh, and we've discussed Disney hotels a gazillion times around here in the past, but I'm more than happy to do it again.

 

[ChrisFL]

I remember when we had an actual "Debate" board and how well that turned out.

 

[DVCconvert]

I hope that "stick" had a "mickey" head on it!!!

 

[YoHo]

I remember when we had an actual "Debate" board and how well that turned out.

Hey now, this place was around from the beginning and just as racous. I remember when there were two boards Rumors and Biz.

 

[SoCalKDG]

Let me preface this posting with the following....

THIS WILL BE THE LAST TIME I POST ANYTHING ON THIS BOARD!!!!!!

Thanks for the update on why "News & Rumors" is needed for debate...it truley clarifies it for me..

Basically..unless you completely agree with all the regular cast of characters on this board then you should go shove a stick up your *****. Because your opinion won't mean a thing.


GOODBYE!!!!!!!

I disagree with these guys all the time, doesn't mean I'm going to stop coming here. Occasionally a response from them may seem personal, but more than likely its just their passion coming out.

Its kind of like the UOG. Many people complained about their restuarant reviews as being harsh. To me, its just another perspective on things(one that I liked). They have since included guest responses(in the yes/no variety) for each restuarant as well. Turns out the UOG was correct in many instances.

To the original topic, I've never been to the Pop, but will stay one day their in January. I'll be able to make a judgement then. Now if a value was more immersion than a deluxe, would that be a problem? What does it mean when some people say they enjoyed Pop more than a deluxe? Or when they love a specific decade at Pop? Its important to be able to see things from other perspectives. I stayed at WL and can truely say its very nicely themed, but I'd rather stay at an Epcot or monorail resort, and will try a moderate before going back to WL.

 

[Lewisc]

I'm not sure you have a "duty" to try to correct another poster who has a different opinion than you have. A person is entitled to post their opinion regarding their favorite resort without another poster feeling the need to subject their opinion to "critical analysis".

I've never stayed in a value hotel but we might be able to make a case that All-Star Movies represents the best in Disney theming. It's really the only hotel that is themed to specific Disney items.

You asked for opinions, I think your post is VERY RUDE after you beat up a poster who had a different opinion than you have in the resort board you proceeded to start a thread in this board.

PLEASE EXPLAIN how your post constitutes news or opinions?

I have a duty to be critical to those who decide not to post in the correct board.

Really, now that may seem critical, but perhaps viewing the way we discuss things around here in this context can help you better understand where and how to post.

You prefaced your post by acknowledging it doesn't really belong in this forum yet you posted it anyway.

I lifted this from a post of mine on the Resorts Board.......

We who love what Disney used to, and still can, be have a duty to not let the idea that POP represents all that is Disney hotel theming in it's truest sense be perpetuated .

Really, now that may seem critical, but perhaps viewing the way we discuss things around here in this context can help lumpalumpa better understand the need for critical analysis.

Any thoughts?

 

[Lord Fantasius]

O.k., so getting to the debate at hand...even though I have not stayed at POP, I think Walt, the "original" Disney, would be irritated/apalled at having three, or four, different levels of hotels around the World. Besides the campground, the only hotels Walt laid out at WDW were five monorail resorts - the original three plus two others (no, GF was not one of them)...all at the same level of themeing (theming?). He never appeared to approve of the idea of not building the best for every family in all of his resorts. And I think Disney, Inc., has fallen far from that model and priced the "deluxe" resorts out of the range of the typical family and forced them into little more than a Motel 6 with Disney characters glued on.

Notwithstanding, in some sense the quote regarding POP being the quintessential Disney resort might be closer to the truth these days because while in addition to having the "Disney service" it is affordable to the average family...it is disturbing that a family of five or six usually has to "settle" for a value resort while the best themeing/service/atmosphere is reserved for the upper income bracket that can enjoy it at any time whether on Disney property or not. While the statement may be true, it is 180% from what I believe WD desired and started WDW to be.

-R

 

[DisneyKidds]

I'm not sure you have a "duty" to try to correct another poster who has a different opinion than you have.

Sorry Lewisc, I was unaware that things had gotten to the point of needing lessons on how to read smilies over here. Like I said, I haven't been around much. Oh, and for what it's worth, I traded a couple of very non-confrontational posts over on the resort board with the poster who made those comments about POP. No offense was taken, as none was meant in the original post.

I've never stayed in a value hotel but we might be able to make a case that All-Star Movies represents the best in Disney theming. It's really the only hotel that is themed to specific Disney items.

Perhaps if you further elaborated on this position, rather than needlessly placing rudeness blame and failing to see that my "starting a post here" was nothing more than an attempt to get a little interesting discussion going while giving Lumpa an example of the type of thing this board used to be great at analyzing and used to make this board more interesting to me and many others, well perhaps then there would be a discussion worth sticking around for.

The good Lord Fantasius has the right idea...........discussion wise. Opinion wise? Started out ok, but POP quintissential Disney beacuse it is affordable? That one would be a tough sell. Walt's resorts were high on value, but as we've seen before Baron's beloved 1972 Poly rates wern't exactly all that affordable back in that day and age. Are Value and Affordability one in the same?

That being said, I think that the Value resorts do provide a lot of value, but I still think they fall way short on true Disney theming.

But I guess I won't discuss that further because Lewisc has informed me that I'm in the wrong forum and I don't know how and when to post. It seems he may be corrct as my time away has left me unfamiliar with how the current cast of characters around here discusses things, or doesn't discuss things.

Sorry Lewis, my bad.

 

[Sarangel]

Gentlebeings, please recall that the rule most enforced around here is "disagree with the idea, don't attack the poster." This means no name calling, no personal judgements, and (hopefully) a reasonable, polite discussion with differing viewpoints.

Sarangel

 

[Lewisc]

Gentlebeings, please recall that the rule most enforced around here is "disagree with the idea, don't attack the poster." This means no name calling, no personal judgements, and (hopefully) a reasonable, polite discussion with differing viewpoints.

Sarangel

Sorry but I don't understand why after attacking a poster on the resort boards the OP saw the need to continue his attack in a board that clearly has nothing to do with the topic.

I have no problem with anyone discussing why they like a particular resort. I just don't see the point in a poster seeing the need to drive a poster off the boards. I don't see the need to subject a poster to critical analysis over their criteria for favoring a resort nor why he felt he had a duty to correct the poster.

Prehaps it was intended as tongue in check but the OP didn't take it that way and it didn't look that way to me.

 

[Sarangel]

Sorry but I don't understand why after attacking a poster on the resort boards the OP saw the need to continue his attack in a board that clearly has nothing to do with the topic.

I'm not sure how you can define the OP as an attack. I can see it as a disagreement, but the OP was polite in requesting clarification of the topic, called the other poster no names, nor did he call the other poster's ideas stupid (or anything analogous). How then is it an attack?

Perhaps that's why some of the regulars on this board are regulars...

Sarangel

 

[Lewisc]

Lumpalump interperted it as an attack. Maybe it's just me but terms like having a "duty" to subject a post to "critical analysis" doesn't sound very polite but rather an attempt to attack someone who dares to have a different opinion.

I'm not a value resort fan but I don't see the need to dissect those who like them.

You're a moderator, I'm not sure how this qualifies as news or a rumor but that's your call if you want to keep this thread open.

I'm not sure how you can define the OP as an attack. I can see it as a disagreement, but the OP was polite in requesting clarification of the topic, called the other poster no names, nor did he call the other poster's ideas stupid (or anything analogous). How then is it an attack?

Perhaps that's why some of the regulars on this board are regulars...

Sarangel

 

[YoHo]

Man, you should see some of the other resort debates that have been left open.

 

[DancingBear]

Lewisc, you seem to be under the impression that the POP Century quotes which DisneyKidds posted at the beginning of this thread were from a Resorts Board thread in which Lumpalump was the OP. That is not true.

 

[Lewisc]

Lewisc, you seem to be under the impression that the POP Century quotes which DisneyKidds posted at the beginning of this thread were from a Resorts Board thread in which Lumpalump was the OP. That is not true.

Based on the context of DisneyKidds post, quotes but no indication who's being quoted, and Lumpalump immediate followup post that looked like a safe assumption. A person who quotes someone else without indicating who's being quoted is the one responsible for any confusion. I can't find the original thread from the resort board.

I still don't agree with the concept of having to a duty to criticize those people who have an opinion different than yours.

 

[All Aboard]

I still don't agree with the concept of having to a duty to criticize those people who have an opinion different than yours.

Lewisc, as Kidds unsuccessfully tried to point out to you, when he made that statement, it was intended to be humorous (tongue in cheek specifically - as indicated by the blue winking smilie). He wasn't serious.