Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

HongKongFooy

Well-Known Member
I guess I don't see your point. If you were running a business of that scale with 10's of thousands of people entering your parks, how would you do it differently and more efficiently? Would you not care about liability? Legal ramifications? If you didn't you'd be out of business pretty quickly.

Let's revisit what I wrote. I was responding to the notion that screenings are not theatre.


Furthermore, for the most part, I would not do it differently if I were Disney decision makers. There is only so much an organization like Uni and Dis can do. The real world prevents intrusive, far reaching measures.

Disney is getting good mileage out of the process it has in place for the very two reasons I clearly stated: reduce the prospects of higher payouts when something terribly goes down and lift its image.

Irrespective it's still security theater and to think otherwise shows naivete.
 
Last edited:

jinx8402

Well-Known Member
Absolutely not.......you got it backwards.

I agree that it is mostly theater, in the sense that you can't catch everything. So you are making people feel safer because you are doing something. But, I just don't agree that if a lawsuit were to come up, Disney can get it thrown out or a reduced pay out because their defense is "Look, we do bag checks, but such a crappy job at it, we missed this, sorry". That won't work, and in fact, I could see it having the opposite effect.
 

Jrb1979

Well-Known Member

DisneyDebRob

Well-Known Member
I would ride it wearing a mask. Its one of the best coasters in Orlando. Masks don't bother me it's that I have to rely on others right now for safety scares me
I had read a earlier comment which I can’t seem to locate right now about the parks being afraid of masks flying off and possibly falling on to to track or wheels. This hour that they did the testing didn’t have a problem with that.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
I had read a earlier comment which I can’t seem to locate right now about the parks being afraid of masks flying off and possibly falling on to to track or wheels. This hour that they did the testing didn’t have a problem with that.
I hadn’t thought of that as a problem. Should be less of a risk than hats and at least they won’t hurt anyone below. The masks should just float down slowly ;). Most coasters have some sort of net under areas where the track crosses a path. Is it gonna be a new job collecting the used mask from the nets 😷 🤢 🤮
 

Jrb1979

Well-Known Member
I hadn’t thought of that as a problem. Should be less of a risk than hats and at least they won’t hurt anyone below. The masks should just float down slowly ;). Most coasters have some sort of net under areas where the track crosses a path. Is it gonna be a new job collecting the used mask from the nets 😷 🤢 🤮
I don't many masks falling off of people. I have been on 100s of coasters with my glasses on and have never lost them.
 

Hawg G

Well-Known Member
I don't many masks falling off of people. I have been on 100s of coasters with my glasses on and have never lost them.

But glasses are heavier, and clamp on a bit.

Who thinks ANY park would have allowed you to wear a mask on a coaster last summer.
 

HongKongFooy

Well-Known Member
But, I just don't agree that if a lawsuit were to come up, Disney can get it thrown out or a reduced pay out because their defense is "Look, we do bag checks, but such a crappy job at it, we missed this, sorry".

I just don't see it that way.

Having even those fairly hollow measures in place shows intent, REASONABLE intent, to address safety....... "reasonable" because once again there is only so much Disney can do to feasibly operate. It's unrealistic for it to conduct more intrusive screenings.
((one exception: if I were a Disney decision maker I'd have those conveyors and monitors like Uni and airports. As a guest I fine without))

If you were a juror under an "all things equal" other than screenings vs no screenings theory would you be inclined to money punish an organization more if it operated without?
Most folk would severely punish something like a Disney for blatantly disregarding even the most basic safety measures in a post 9/11 setting far more than if it had something in place.
 

Kevin_W

Well-Known Member
I hadn’t thought of that as a problem. Should be less of a risk than hats and at least they won’t hurt anyone below. The masks should just float down slowly ;). Most coasters have some sort of net under areas where the track crosses a path. Is it gonna be a new job collecting the used mask from the nets 😷 🤢 🤮

I don't know of any coaster where they let you wear hats, though.

I think masks coming off is a valid concern and not part of the "any reason not to wear one" crowd. But it's possible that it's not an issue. Like sunglasses, most of the force is air pressure coming straight at your hear, which is just going to press the mask into your face. A hat has a brim to catch the wind and potentially lift if off your head, but a mask doesn't have that.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
I just don't see it that way.

Having even those fairly hollow measures in place shows intent, REASONABLE intent, to address safety....... "reasonable" because once again there is only so much Disney can do to feasibly operate. It's unrealistic for it to conduct more intrusive screenings.
((one exception: if I were a Disney decision maker I'd have those conveyors and monitors like Uni and airports. As a guest I fine without))

If you were a juror under an "all things equal" other than screenings vs no screenings theory would you be inclined to money punish an organization more if it operated without?
Most folk would severely punish something like a Disney for blatantly disregarding even the most basic safety measures in a post 9/11 setting far more than if it had something in place.
In lawsuits the really big payouts aren’t from actual damages but from punitive damages intended to punish a corporation for negligence. If the company makes a reasonable effort to stop someone from bringing a weapon in (which I agree with you Disney does) then it’s unlikely they would be found negligent so no punitive damages. If an incident involving a weapon happened there’s no stopping someone from suing Disney anyway but the most they would get is a payout for actual damages. Avoiding punitive damages is the bigger deal. In relation to the current coronavirus situation if most or all similar venues have temp checks, capacity limits, social distancing markers and mask policies it’s possible Disney could be considered negligent for operating without them. They would open themselves up to potential punitive damages in a lawsuit which could mean millions. Deep pockets = larger payout.
 

dolbyman

Well-Known Member
90% of a good Vlog is editing.

Don't know how vloggers who do a two hour shakey-cam unedited walkthru get subscribers.

We watch his hotel explorations once in a while .. he is amazed by toilet paper and doorknobs .. gives us a good chuckle .. Sometimes long unscripted ramblings have something natural to it.. basically the same way you would see it
 

Parker in NYC

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Agreed. One group seems to be the loudest, which makes for top of the newscast. If everyone was just doing what the business asked, it would be a slow news day and you would not see these video posts.

Sorry but "both sides are bad" doesn't work for me here. There's plenty of news without those stories. It's a way of sweeping this stuff under the rug entirely.

I keep reading this and get upset every time. (Not with you)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Back
Top Bottom