AEfx
Well-Known Member
How very diplomatic of you.Pixie Duster said:On a different note, I will take some of AEfx's advice an attempt to softly educate those they may need some assistance is learning the ways of the industry.
I guess my point in posting in this thread really was that I could tell the original post was written out of frustration, and I just felt it was the wrong way to go about making the desired change in attitude. The pot boiled over for Speck and he felt the need to pull a rant from a thread and put it into another one.
That said, there are two issues here - one, the unrealistic expectations, and two, the way some people view the recent changes at WDW as less than stellar. I'm sometimes in the latter category, but I can always recognize the "good" stuff as well. I think this thread is confusing those two issues, because I think what may be interpreted as "not enough money" is really "not as much magic". I tell you - E tickets are nice and all, but I'd be happy if they filled that space over at 20K with a Sleeping Beauty dark ride with no better technology than in Snow White - because it would be magical. And to many of us, some of those recent additions have lacked the magic we've come to expect. Magic doesn't always equal money.
There is also a lot of exaggeration in this thread in regards to people's expectations - it's not THAT bad (I'm all for embelishment, but if you believed everything Speck said in this thread you'd think the signal:noise ratio around here was as bad as DIS...). It is highly annoying sometimes, but the best way to prevent it is to address it at the time, i.e. "That's not realistic because in terms of park economics...", not waiting until it's such a percieved issue that you just start ranting at no one in particular, because, again - they won't even know it's directed at them.
AEfx