Then either set your alleged record straight and point out who said what, or else let it lie....
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Proof of WEDway PeopleMover under the U.S. Capitol
- Thread starter Progress.City
- Start date
And yet you started this thread by claiming people had said you were wrong. Make up your mind....
Then prove it. That or stop trying to make yourself feel better by throwing accusations at others.....
Again, if you're going to accuse someone, then name who it is so they can address the "allegations." Otherwise you're just yammering to make yourself feel better....
So instead you'll make ambiguous accusations towards others, all in the name of peace? Either put up or don't make the claims at all. Not letting those you accuse defend themselves is a coward's way out, peaceful intentions aside....
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
Now that we know, I'm not sure what to do with that information. I'm pretty sure I rode a people mover type vehicle at Expo 67. (in fact, I think it was called a People Mover) It's old hat. They could have it in every city in the world and I still don't see what the point is. If it is a workable system, shouldn't it be found in places other then WDW. Why is it even a conversation anymore?
The idea to use them at WDW was a good one and fit in with the overall vision of Walt Disney, but, you don't really think that a bunch of cartoonists knew how to design that system do you? They weren't really engineers, they were thrust into that job and did a good job of making many things work, but there really was a limit to what they were able to do. Bombardier was probably the logical company to work with to build the system and they just responded to the requirements of what Disney wanted to happen. Which leads me again to... What is the purpose of this earth shaking discovery?
The idea to use them at WDW was a good one and fit in with the overall vision of Walt Disney, but, you don't really think that a bunch of cartoonists knew how to design that system do you? They weren't really engineers, they were thrust into that job and did a good job of making many things work, but there really was a limit to what they were able to do. Bombardier was probably the logical company to work with to build the system and they just responded to the requirements of what Disney wanted to happen. Which leads me again to... What is the purpose of this earth shaking discovery?
Because some people may be interested in it even if you're not?
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
My point was not whether or not I'm interested, my point was that this subject was brought up like a massive denial was in place. It isn't, I don't care if DC has 50 of them. My question would be... why aren't there more all over the country? Why is this approached like a major conspiracy to hide the fact that the technology is being used elsewhere? This seemed to me to be yet another situation where Peter is trying desperately to connect the fact that DC has one, which I don't recall anyone arguing about, to some hidden plans that Disney may or may not have had in the past. It's nice to see that they do work in real life and not just a theme park even though an argument could be made that here isn't a lot of difference between the US Congress and a Fantasy Theme Park.
rsoxguy
Well-Known Member
On a less hostile note, I've ridden that thing in D.C. I have taken a couple tours of the Capital Building, the Senate, the Congress, and one time we were invited to sit on the floor of the House because they wanted people to be seated for some speech regarding an important issue of the day. The underground transport was kind of cool.
mergatroid
Well-Known Member
We really don't need people like you coming on here making none hostile posts. There's a very good argument going on and you come on here posting none argumentative stuff spoiling things. If it were up to me, people like you would receive a ban
rsoxguy
Well-Known Member
We really don't need people like you coming on here making none hostile posts. There's a very good argument going on and you come on here posting none argumentative stuff spoiling things. If it were up to me, people like you would receive a ban
If it's any consolation, a woman made a rude remark to me this morning as I was shopping, and I gave her a stern disapproving look. I'm sure that she rues the day that she crossed swords with this Red Sox fan.
So I choose the coward way out. So be it. I'm not starting another war here. It's not worth it!
EDIT - I deleted all of my posts in our conversation because no one wants to hear us arguing.
Last edited:
mergatroid
Well-Known Member
Why can't we just all get along?!
It was during that big monorail debate. I used the DC WEDway as evidence of something to make a point. I was attacked by people claiming I was making things up. I tried desperately to find something to back up my statement but couldn't. Now, years later, here it is. That's all.
Instead of closure, I get more attacks. That debate left a scar that has not healed. Closure is my way to heal that wound.
Last edited:
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
OK, I can accept that, but, the wording you used led me, at least, to believe that you were still trying to reinvent the wheel. Even the Monorail Footings had a number of high end posters agreeing that they existed. I know that I posted on it and the only reason was that you seemed to insist that it had some sort of significance other then something that happened at the time and was abandoned as priorities and plans changed. Again, attempting to prove something that had already been proven, not just on this board, but, in publicly broadcast information. There was no need then to convince those that didn't believe and there is no sense to reincarnating the entire discussion when even if true (which it appears to be) it really has no relevance to anything other then your desire to prove your detractors to be wrong. Most of us already knew that!
It always seemed to me that you were/are still trying to imply that the fact that they exist indicates the thought that they still plan on using them for something. All we were saying is... no they aren't, they were just a think ahead plan that changed over time. It is now a "we once thought that" plan that is no longer the case. When I was young I always dreamed of owning a boat. I even sold some other things to have the cash to buy one. Right after doing that, I met my future wife and what would have been my boat ended up on her ring finger for 29 years. My plans changed and I still currently have not even the remotest of desire to have that boat or that particular wife, for that matter.
mergatroid
Well-Known Member
Wow, it's like a Jerry Springer show on here today 