• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

A Spirited 15 Rounds ...

The Empress Lilly

Well-Known Member
What happened to Lee? And I remember Corrus back in the day (I think I've been on here longer than some posters have been alive)
Lee posted some info about Jim Hill, that he had a criminal record about, from memory, domestic violence in the mid 90's. Others thought it a bit unessecary to try to harm somebody twenty years later. A heated debate ensued.
 

alphac2005

Well-Known Member
Interesting comments and I personally feel that they're spot on. Having been on the site for 20 years, I can say without question that some of the aforementioned named users brought some very interesting insight, but more than anything, plenty of negativity. The heart of the forums is @marni1971 with Martin's insight into the future and historical knowledge of the parks.

Sometimes I miss some of the past mentioned posters, but at the end of the day, the forum has overall become a lot more upbeat.
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
sorry.. but he had the "best inside info" ever on these threads.. people state that they didn't like him.. and I don't know why.. with the exception of being told the truth... no ONE.. and I mean NO ONE HERE.. gave you the TRUE SKINNY of the inner workings at WDW. and we are all at a loss since he is gone..
Maybe it was often the nasty tone in which he laid things out. I appreciated his information too and sometimes he'd have a really good thread or some great posts. But he was snarky and dismissive. There are reasons some people had a problem with it. It felt attention seeking but I also still appreciated the information he gave. I actually think it's a bit of a shame he disappeared into oblivion and hasn't started a blog anywhere. I also feel a lot of posters piggy-backed off him and started spewing the same dismissive "fan boi" "pixie duster" ... which as you may or may not have noticed, has quieted down since he left. I know it sounds like I'm knocking him, but I'm just speaking the truth about how it really was. Some were too enamored by him and I get it.
 
Last edited:

StarBurst

Well-Known Member
Eddie Sotto's thread was so interesting with his design insights, and experience as an Imagineer. I recall some years ago that he eventually ended his thread, as he mentioned he had just about shared all he could with the members.

Former threads by Spirit, Lee, PhotoDave, and a few others, would sometimes spur on some lively group discussions. ;)

Presently, I enjoy reading posts from many different members., who contribute helpful information in N&R, General, and other categories. There will always be some people that may have actual connections to insider knowledge, but what keeps this forum going, is the participation from many of its members.
having eddie post here was kinda cool
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
I still would like someone who espouses more on the parks like he did. He filled a void left by Al Lutz for me as others only provide small tidbits instead of larger stories.
But Al Lutz wasn't nasty or negative. I think Spirit could have accomplished a lot more instead of just ranting on here to us. I understand the void left and how some think he filled that, and at times he might have. At least the site that shall not be named is calling WDW and Disneyland out on their lack of maintenance. FINALLY someone is doing it. Why wasn't Spirit doing that? He seemed to come around to rile some folks up and toss in some nuggets of info.
 

MisterPenguin

Rumormonger
Premium Member
When it comes to inside info, I want to know decisions made; not who are on the ins or outs and who's fighting with whom in the corporate structure.

Because we all know that when people relay office politics, it's always skewed to their point of view and, thus, not totally trustworthy. IOW, the source of internal politics is too often not a reliable reporter even if their take is relayed accurately to us.

And so, I value the loss of office gossip as not much of a loss.
 

NoChesterHester

Well-Known Member
When it comes to inside info, I want to know decisions made; not who are on the ins or outs and who's fighting with whom in the corporate structure.

Because we all know that when people relay office politics, it's always skewed to their point of view and, thus, not totally trustworthy. IOW, the source of internal politics is too often not a reliable reporter even if their take is relayed accurately to us.

And so, I value the loss of office gossip as not much of a loss.
Worth noting that there was a lot of narrative during the Spirit posting era that there was ZERO talent left at WDI and that they were incapable of rising to the challenge again to lead the industry. Pandora was going to be a disaster. It was narrative, not truth.
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
Worth noting that there was a lot of narrative during the Spirit posting era that there was ZERO talent left at WDI and that they were incapable of rising to the challenge again to lead the industry. Pandora was going to be a disaster. It was narrative, not truth.
Yep, he definitely had his own narrative at times. That's called "wishful thinking because I don't agree with this" ...
 

MerlinTheGoat

Well-Known Member
Lee posted some info about Jim Hill, that he had a criminal record about, from memory, domestic violence in the mid 90's. Others thought it a bit unessecary to try to harm somebody twenty years later. A heated debate ensued.
First degree battery was only mentioned because it happened to be included in the entire Orange County Jail document on Jim Hill's criminal record. The crime that was relevant to the conversation was theft. Jim had been a repeat offender for shoplifting merchandise from a gift shop inside Disney World. And he was banned from Disney property for a good while (don't know how long).

Lee brought this up because Disney lifted this ban and started to form a relationship with Jim. Jim is now a famous Disney blogger (or was, dunno if he's as well known today as a few years ago). I gather he's been mentioned in some of their official media, he gives tours and has been invited to many events including D23. Among other things.

Now it's not news that Disney has a rather large amount of amateur pro-Disney people working social media for their benefit. There's a lot of controversy around these non-employee employees however. They generally don't disclose that Disney is effectively bribing them with gifts for positive press. I've also witnessed some become hostile towards people who aren't mindlessly devoted to everything Disney does. Robb Alvey is an example. I don't know what he's up to nowadays, but back a couple of years ago he became notorious for getting into fights on Twitter or his own forums. If someone didn't like a ride he was praising, he'd call them names and ban them. It's unhealthy behavior, often resembling a drug addict/dealer situation. But Disney encourages and rewards it...

I think Lee felt Jim Hill's relationship in particular felt even more sinister and gross than the others. Almost like extortion, Disney being willing to forgive and even reward his theft as long as he plays nice and does what they tell him.

Someone had a great post in that thread about the relationship between Disney and their army of amateur bloggers-

the problem with "social media influencers" is they're inherently for sale. most don't disclose the perks the get (something journalists do), and don't necessarily see themselves bound to the same code of ethics journalists are. now, when you're a consumer who pays attention to the product closely and can cut through the bull, who cares, right? except the more prevalent and prominent social media brand advocates become, the less disney has to interact with the real media. and that allows them to pawn off an inferior product, or cover up stories with big real world implications, etc.
 

MisterPenguin

Rumormonger
Premium Member
I follow a bunch of v/bloggers and they always mention when they're paying out of their own pocket or are being comped. Some won't even do a review if comped, they'll just document their experience and then do a review after they've paid for it.

Yes, that's anecdotal. But so is the claim there are lots of v/bloggers secretly "on the take." Is that just like the patently absurd claim that an event with thousands of participants is 'filled with bloggers'?

IOW, I'd need to see some sort of proof that these freeloading pixie dusters exist, and it'll need to be more than just pointing out two of them.
 
Top Bottom