A Spirited Perfect Ten

[BlueSkyDriveBy]

If you choose to believe there are no shop lifters, drunk drivers, people who have been involved in civil disobedience, or people who got arrested for possession of weed on these boards.... well you are free to do so.

I'm disturbed that all of these infractions are being lumped together as if they're equal.

There's a big difference between getting arrested for a peaceful protest over climate change or nabbed for pot possession versus getting caught shoplifting merchandise to be utilized in fraud. What Hill got busted for doing on Disney property did not involve protesting or smoking dope. And it happened more than once. This was not a situation of making a single poor decision. Everyone makes those kinds of mistakes all the time. But making those mistakes over and over again toasts any defense of poor judgment born of immaturity.

The devil is in the details. Never forget that.

 

[BlueSkyDriveBy]

Again, I don't really care about these events that happened over 20 years ago. What I do care about is that Disney, a multinational conglomerate that's infamous for going after daycare centers with non-authorized Disney character cutouts on their walls, doesn't seem concerned about embracing social media types with dubious histories involving TWDC. Given the operational history of Disney, that just boggles my mind, and makes me seriously question just how incestuous these media relationships actually are.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

I would get my panties all in a bunch over this, but they are in the wash, .......and I really just don't care.

Wake me up when Disney hires the famous spokesperson Jared Fogle.

 

[Nemo14]

Again, I don't really care about these events that happened over 20 years ago. What I do care about is that Disney, a multinational conglomerate that's infamous for going after daycare centers with non-authorized Disney character cutouts on their walls, doesn't seem concerned about embracing social media types with dubious histories involving TWDC. Given the operational history of Disney, that just boggles my mind, and makes me seriously question just how incestuous these media relationships actually are.

And I think that this was exactly what Lee was trying to point out.

 

[Hakunamatata]

I'm not assuming anything, I'm responding to what you wrote.

But I never said that there weren't any members here that had not been in jail. You assumed that I believed that because you did not understand my response to your post.

 

[unkadug]

I'm disturbed that all of these infractions are being lumped together as if they're equal.

There's a big difference between getting arrested for a peaceful protest over climate change or nabbed for pot possession versus getting caught shoplifting merchandise to be utilized in fraud. What Hill got busted for doing on Disney property did not involve protesting or smoking dope. And it happened more than once. This was not a situation of making a single poor decision. Everyone makes those kinds of mistakes all the time. But making those mistakes over and over again toasts any defense of poor judgment born of immaturity.

The devil is in the details. Never forget that.

I'm disturbed by your lumping together people getting arrested from a protest over climate change with people arrested on drug charges.

Have you no decency.....really?

 

[unkadug]

Some Questions:

1. Did your present employers, The Huffington Post and Touring Plans/Unofficial Guide, know about what had happened at WDW in 95 and 96 before hiring you? And for that matter did D23 or any of Disney arms with which you have worked alongside over the years know? To put it another way, did you tell these parties about what had happened?
2. Depending on how you answer the previous question; why should we trust you?

Wow...are you Prosecutor for the State or something?

He is not on trial here.

 

[BlueSkyDriveBy]

I'm disturbed by your lumping together people getting arrested from a protest over climate change with people arrested on drug charges.

Have you no decency.....really?

I was waiting for the winky emoticon, but alas... there was none. So this post was actually serious? Really?

Oh, yes. Let's equate weed with crack cocaine or heroin. And while we're at it, let's compare someone who enjoys a small glass of wine with their evening meal to someone downing a quart of vodka every week.

The devil is in the details. Using a phrase such as "breaking the law" that by its nature is such a broad generalization to begin with, makes any defense essentially meaningless. We have all broken the law over the course of living our lives. It's always a matter of degree involving which laws are being broken and to what extent.

IMHO, smoking dope and protesting are inconsequential, right up there with jaywalking on an empty street. But that's not what we were originally discussing. Therein lies the difference, once again.

 

[unkadug]

Right is right

Wrong is wrong

You break the law ...you are a criminal

It's all black and white.There is no gray area as far as the law is concerned.

 

[Hakunamatata]

Right is right

Wrong is wrong

You break the law ...you are a criminal

It's all black and white.There is no gray area as far as the law is concerned.

I agree. Breaking a law is not measured in the significance of the law that is broken. You either break a law or you honor the law. The consequences and impact of breaking the law vary, but there is no third side to the coin. A law is broken or it is not broken.

 

[BlueSkyDriveBy]

Allow me to reframe this to something more relatable.

What I see TWDC doing in this situation with Hill would be like me consulting with my ex on a professional project for my small business. Sounds innocuous enough, right? However, this is years after the ex refused to pay alimony previously agreed to, which forced me into bankruptcy to discharge the debts that the ex ran up during the marriage. The ex was wrong in the past and willingly admits it now, but still expects me to "forgive and forget" and hire him anyway to further his professional career and increase his income.

Anyone with half a moral compass would tell me flat out that I would be a bloomin' idiot for hiring my ex under these circumstances. And they would be correct in doing so.

So what makes TWDC any different regarding their situation with Hill? Sorry, but I just don't see any difference.

 

[unkadug]

Allow me to reframe this to something more relatable.

What I see TWDC doing in this situation with Hill would be like me consulting with my ex on a professional project for my small business. Sounds innocuous enough, right? However, this is years after the ex refused to pay alimony previously agreed to, which forced me into bankruptcy to discharge the debts that the ex ran up during the marriage. The ex was wrong in the past and willingly admits it now, but still expects me to "forgive and forget" and hire him anyway to further his professional career and increase his income.

Anyone with half a moral compass would tell me flat out that I would be a bloomin' idiot for hiring my ex under these circumstances. And they would be correct in doing so.

So what makes TWDC any different regarding their situation with Hill? Sorry, but I just don't see any difference.

This is really none of anybody's business. Unless you work for Disney HR then what you guys are on a witch hunt about is none of your business.

Why are you guys hell bent on getting him fired from all of his current gigs?

Lets dig up some dirt on each and every one of you shall we?

This whole thread needs to be shut down as it is nothing more than vindictive witch hunting.

 

[BlueSkyDriveBy]

I agree. Breaking a law is not measured in the significance of the law that is broken. You either break a law or you honor the law. The consequences and impact of breaking the law vary, but there is no third side to the coin. A law is broken or it is not broken.

And as a business leader, do you equate a potential employee who was busted for pot possession with someone who defrauded dozens of investors a la Bernie Madoff? Do you equate a potential employee who was arrested for a climate change demonstration with someone who was dealing crack cocaine at a schoolyard?

Who cares about "breaking the law" when you fail to consider what law was broken and to what extreme. We all break the law. Every day. Driving a bit too fast, failing to use the turn signal, jaywalking while shopping, et al. It's how we all live in modern society.

Judgments are made all the time regarding people we interact with. Part of being mature and responsible adults is realizing that some judgments we dole out are excessively harsh and unwarranted. Not hiring someone because they were arrested for protesting is excessively harsh. But not hiring someone because of prior investment fraud might be fully warranted. You need to examine every case individually before making any snap judgments because someone "broke the law."

Taking a black-and-white, all-or-nothing attitude such as "you either break a law or honor a law" is childish and a disservice to society. There will always be varying shades of grey. And to willfully ignore those shades of grey is the hallmark of authoritarian dystopian culture, as found in The Hunger Games. Not exactly the kind of world I wish to live in.

 

[Hakunamatata]

Taking a black-and-white, all-or-nothing attitude such as "you either break a law or honor a law" is childish and a disservice to society. There will always be varying shades of grey. And to willfully ignore those shades of grey is the hallmark of authoritarian dystopian culture, as found in The Hunger Games. Not exactly the kind of world I wish to live in.

Acknowledging that a law is either broken or it's not broken is not childish. The shades of grey come into the picture when evaluating the significance of the resulting impact of the law that is broken. The question isn't if the law is broken when it gets broken. You drop a cup and it shatters, do you stand over it and say it is not broken? If you do, you are the delusional one, not the person acknowledging the broken glass on the floor.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

Hill is a credentialed journalist at a legitamate media outlet. He had a 6 month trespass that expired 19.5 years ago. Hill now has a site and blog that are some of the most popular in the community. I feel safe in saying that at this point, Hill is helping Disney far more than he is hurting Disney.

 

[matt9112]

Remember how it was back in the late 60s? Maybe you don't but when you flew into LA or NYC it looked like you were flying into a solid wall of yuck. Lots of respiratory issues until strict auto and factory emission controls were instituted.

What you see today is the last 5%, that first 95% was easy, the last 5% is the tough one. China is just starting to work on the first 95% and once they do that the cities air will be much better. They are moving on it.

some would argue the last 5% isn't worth the cost... (surpassing the cost benefit equilibrium)

 

[matt9112]

BRB gotta grab popcorn

better rent a machine.

 

[matt9112]

Thats another reaaaalllllly big question that needs answering.

Someone has a serious Axe to grind.

maybe somebody isn't a fan of invincible know it alls that get free everything from the mouse....

 

[matt9112]

I have an account here, too. If you all want to dig up stories of the stupid garbage I did 20 years ago (shut up; I was escaping a cult and had serious daddy issues), I seriously doubt I'm going to jump on here to defend myself to a bunch of people I've never met. (Okay, I have met @lentesta. But to my credit, I refrained from stalking before he had to institute a restraining order.)

cult eh?

 

[the.dreamfinder]

Acknowledging that a law is either broken or it's not broken is not childish. The shades of grey come into the picture when evaluating the significance of the resulting impact of the law that is broken. The question isn't if the law is broken when it gets broken. You drop a cup and it shatters, do you stand over it and say it is not broken? If you do, you are the delusional one, not the person acknowledging the broken glass on the floor.

Jim's not some guy who was the victim of a broken justice system. Jim's a repeat offender whose crimes occurred on Disney property. Jim plead down those charges, so what he actually did is worse than what the record suggests. Jim is not an individual who should be forgiven so easily.