A Spirited Perfect Ten

spacemt354

spacemt354

Chili's
Goofyernmost said:
So your saying, anyone with a differing opinion is not welcome to the conversation? If you don't always think that "Spirits" thoughts are the end all, be all, they should stay out of the conversation? If you are unable to say... "I agree", please don't mess up our ego fest? All you want is someone to say... you got that right, there is no other possible reasonable explanation or way of seeing the situation, right or wrong? Agree or take a hike? Seems reasonable.
Click to expand...
Nope. Exactly the opposite actually.

If people dont like that another person has an opposing view, or is bringing up stuff they dont want to hear, then why restrict yourself to this environment?

This kind of argument you bring up has been brought up for years on these threads. If you don't like the conversation, then why stay? It's so that people can complain about the topic of conversation and then continually oppose it.

If you have info to counter a claim, then present it. But if you're just disagreeing and have no info to back it up, you're just wasting bandwidth.
 
Phil12

Phil12

Well-Known Member
Lee said:
There are several aspects of the whole China drama that I can categorize as irrefutable fact.
In the case of Mr. Fritz, I do not possess "evidence" beyond the circumstantial, which is enough for me to form my educated opinion..
Click to expand...
That's the root of the problem with this China subject. Being able to separate speculation, guesswork and wishful thinking from actual fact has been a difficult exercise. Some people have accepted as fact that $800M is missing or was used for illegal purposes. Some people have asserted that Willow Bay will be forced to resign from her job due to unethical behavior. Yet the facts tell us a different and more plausible story.

Lee said:
Excellent idea. Doing so quietly would be of added benefit, as well.
Click to expand...
If my viewpoint is not to your liking feel free to disregard my input. Even though I disagree with you on this topic, I still value your thoughts on the matter. I think that by using skeptical scrutiny we'll be able to winnow away the facts from the nonsense.
 
LuvtheGoof

LuvtheGoof

Grill Master
Premium Member
Funmeister said:
With all due respect...with everything you are questioning can you provide evidence that proves the opposite?

I mean if I make a statement and you say it is false then I would say it is on you to prove me wrong.

I think it is only fair that some hard evidence is presented from the disagreeing side.

Fair?
Click to expand...
Why does @AEfx need to provide proof? Spirit has never provided any proof for any of it, except to say, believe me because of who I am. While I can certainly believe the inside information about new rides/attractions/etc. - except Frozen Ever After - how did he miss that one? - how can I believe the rantings of someone when NOT ONE SINGLE NEWS AGENCY IN THE ENTIRE WORLD has reported any of this. Please provide PROOF as to how this is possible. And to me, this is proof that it isn't anything like what Spirit has stated.

And yet lots of news agencies are reporting on Disney's awful practice of laying off IT workers, and making Disney look extremely bad in the press over it. This is such a minor issue compared to what Spirit is claiming for SDL, and yet no one else is reporting it? C'mon. Really???? Let's get back to reality.
 
AEfx

AEfx

Well-Known Member
spacemt354 said:
Nope. Exactly the opposite actually.

If people dont like that another person has an opposing view, or is bringing up stuff they dont want to hear, then why restrict yourself to this environment?

This kind of argument you bring up has been brought up for years on these threads. If you don't like the conversation, then why stay? It's so that people can complain about the topic of conversation and then continually oppose it.

If you have info to counter a claim, then present it. But if you're just disagreeing and have no info to back it up, you're just wasting bandwidth.
Click to expand...

Actually I think you have that wrong.

If you are going to make a claim on a message board, you better be able to back it up if you want folks to take you seriously. If you can't, then you shouldn't be making the claim on a message board.

And if the claim is so extreme in nature as this one, a message board isn't the place to do it, anyway.
 
AEfx

AEfx

Well-Known Member
PhotoDave219 said:
Nah, its dealmaking. Its how that stuff happens. Happens constantly.
Click to expand...

Dave, if you had this massive story about a subject, would you then go try to get the one journalist out of thousands who regularly writes about that company and you already suspect of being "bought"?
 
Goofyernmost

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
spacemt354 said:
Nope. Exactly the opposite actually.

If people are annoyed that another person has an opposing view, or is bringing up stuff they dont want to hear, then they should simply ignore it.

This kind of argument you bring up has been brought up for years on these threads. If you don't like the conversation, then why stay? It's so that people can complain about the topic of conversation and then continually oppose it.

Those are two different things. If you have info to counter a claim, then present it. But if you're just disagreeing and have no info to back it up, you're just wasting bandwidth.
Click to expand...
OK, but, a conversation is not a conversation if no one is conversing. If we all felt that way then every single thread would be the first one followed by a group post saying... Yea, man!

To me what is being implied here is that this is a club where everyone is there only to pat each other on the back and admire them for their factual and crystal clear arrangement of words. The mere fact that this is a Rumors and News sub-section is confusing in itself. When you see something posted is it a rumor or is it factual news.

Without questioning everything is news, which it is not by any stretch of the imagination. Without dissenting viewpoints and questioning... it becomes a field day for anyone that has an agenda and doesn't want to be made to prove or disprove their announcements. So if those that are making counter claims must be backed up by fact, then the original statements must also be backed up by fact and not just opinion.

That creates a situation of checks and balances and lets people either decide on their own or be shown total unquestionable reasons that they should believe either side. The only reason why these discussion continue is because neither side is able to do that. Why? Because unless proven it is nothing more then opinion coming from either direction. That is a discussion. I know of no one that argues actual facts. Just because someone says something does not make it a fact. Sorry, it just doesn't work that way.
 
hopemax

hopemax

Well-Known Member
asianway said:
I often wonder what most of these Disney defenders do for a living. I bucket it like this:

1.) stay at home spouse who loves to spend their SO money like a drunken sailor. Never did a day of real work on their life.
Click to expand...

This is me, seriously. So how does that fit in with your hypothesis?
 
PhotoDave219

PhotoDave219

Well-Known Member
AEfx said:
Dave, if you had this massive story about a subject, would you then go try to get the one journalist out of thousands who regularly writes about that company and you already suspect of being "bought"?
Click to expand...

My friend, myself and others have explained out many times how business journalism works at that level. I'm not sure how many times you want me to rephrase the same concept?

Suggesting that he was "bought" is simple hyperbole used by too many people in here that arent getting it.

Lets say I have questions about your giant Project in Africa. But things arent going well there, things dont look good right this second and you dont want to talk about Africa. Instead, you want to talk about how great the company is doing Stateside and hey, we'll give you an exclusive on our new Stateside project if you hold off on Africa for awhile and You promise that when you're willing to talk Africa, I'll get first dibs. We end up building bridges and a respectful relationship with the payoff being further access later.

Thats how business journalism is done. Thats how you get access and build relationships.

It is just that simple.
 
the.dreamfinder

the.dreamfinder

Well-Known Member
CaptainAmerica said:
Bull. If ANY of this was legit and documented, it would be EVERYWHERE, not just on this one message board (no offense to @wdwmagic, who runs a fine site). Mr. Spirit could make absurd sums of money if he were to sell the story to the highest bidder. But no, he wants us to believe that there's not one single enterprising journalist out there willing to bury Disney and make a name for himself because every single one of them has been bought off by Robert A. Iger. Come on, seriously?
Click to expand...
How many years did it take for the American media to cover the worker suicides at the Foxconn facilities that make much of the world's electronic devices?
How many years did it take for them to treat the NSA domestic surveillance programs like a major story as opposed to something on page A9?

Just because a BIG story is out there does not mean it will be covered. A handful of tech blogs reported on the suicides at "iPod City" back in the mid aughts, but it never recieved significant attention beyond that. A now retracted piece of faux journalism on This American Life brought it to the forefront. The warrantless wiretapping program was largely brushed off in the American media until The Guardian recieved and reported on the Snowden documents two years ago.

Spirit never said that there weren't ANY journalist who wanted to cover this, but rather the most influential outlets were turning the story down or their reporters were told by Disney to look elsewhere for fear of reprisals. This is big story that Spirit, because of his circumstances working in Asia and his connections at Disney and in the greater media/entertainment industry, carefully put together over a long period of time. Not every journalist has the reporting background or an employer willing to assign them to such an expensive and time consuming project. If institutions like The Wall Street Journal or the Times or the like don't want to cover it, it's not going to become a story that matters.
 
Last edited:
AEfx

AEfx

Well-Known Member
PhotoDave219 said:
My friend, myself and others have explained out many times how business journalism works at that level. I'm not sure how many times you want me to rephrase the same concept?

It is just that simple.
Click to expand...

You are being obtuse and not answering my question.

If YOU had this story, would YOU go to the ONE reporter who MOST likely was in-bed, to get a quid pro quo, etc. whatever you want to call it, from the WDC who regularly writes about them, knowing all that you just said to me?

I would. If I was playing this game, because I'd know that a WDC story would be coming out anyway and I could point to it and say SEE!

Given that WDW1974 has now upped the accusations and named him, I'm waiting for the next step - a C&D. "Look guys, they've got me - I can't say anything else."

If I were playing the game going on here, that's how I'd get myself out of it.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom