News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District

MrPromey

MrPromey

Well-Known Member
RamblinWreck said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Star_ThrowerMany people posting in this thread are only vaguely aware of the situation and just have the spun up short version from whatever politically slanted source they heard it from.
Click to expand...
Which is why we see people showing up, almost a thousand pages in with the same basic arguments that have been discussed, refuted, and debunked ad nauseam in this thread, already.

The problem there is, how do you handle it?

Do you patiently repeat what you've said dozens of times before, let it go, or become snarky?

If you just repeat, you're wasting your time (and the time of anyone else who's been following) in the discussion.

If you let it go, you leave that person and potentially others who stumble in late and don't bother to read back, the impression that what they're saying is actually accurate and has merit.

If you become snarky (guilty), you effectively stop adding constructive dialog to the conversation.

I've been giving this some thought and am thinking the best approach might be a short response and some links to earlier posts.

Something to the effect of "Already discussed ad nauseam. See here, here, and here for examples of why this is wrong, doesn't matter, or is being misstated." and then just sort of ignoring that person's response after that.

Then again, it isn't the job of any of us to necessarily educate strangers which reminds me of the story of the little girl on the beach with the starfish.*

In this situation, I'm not so sure the perspective of the adult is the wrong one.

I don't know. 🤷‍♂️

*The original of this is of a young man rather than a little girl and more wordy and a lot more meditative, as written. While a little unfair to the original author, I kind of prefer one version or another of the counterfeit/adaption.
 
GrumpyFan

GrumpyFan

Well-Known Member
MrPromey said:
Which is why we see people showing up, almost a thousand pages in with the same basic arguments that have been discussed, refuted, and debunked ad nauseam in this thread, already.

The problem there is, how do you handle it?

Do you patiently repeat what you've said dozens of times before, let it go, or become snarky?

If you just repeat, you're wasting your time (and the time of anyone else who's been following) in the discussion.

If you let it go, you leave that person and potentially others who stumble in late and don't bother to read back, the impression that what they're saying is actually accurate and has merit.

If you become snarky (guilty), you effectively stop adding constructive dialog to the conversation.

I've been giving this some thought and am thinking the best approach might be a short response and some links to earlier posts.

Something to the effect of "Already discussed ad nauseam. See here, here, and here for examples of why this is wrong, doesn't matter, or is being misstated." and then just sort of ignoring that person's response after that.

Then again, it isn't the job of any of us to necessarily educate strangers which reminds me of the story of the little girl on the beach with the starfish.*

In this situation, I'm not so sure the perspective of the adult is the wrong one.

I don't know. 🤷‍♂️

*The original of this is of a young man rather than a little girl and more wordy and a lot more meditative, as written. While a little unfair to the original author, I kind of prefer one version or another of the counterfeit/adaption.
Click to expand...
This thread needs its own FAQ section. 😂
But, seriously, it would be great if someone could put together something along those lines as well as a timeline of all the events around RCID.
 
S

seascape

Well-Known Member
MrPromey said:
Which is why we see people showing up, almost a thousand pages in with the same basic arguments that have been discussed, refuted, and debunked ad nauseam in this thread, already.

The problem there is, how do you handle it?

Do you patiently repeat what you've said dozens of times before, let it go, or become snarky?

If you just repeat, you're wasting your time (and the time of anyone else who's been following) in the discussion.

If you let it go, you leave that person and potentially others who stumble in late and don't bother to read back, the impression that what they're saying is actually accurate and has merit.

If you become snarky (guilty), you effectively stop adding constructive dialog to the conversation.

I've been giving this some thought and am thinking the best approach might be a short response and some links to earlier posts.

Something to the effect of "Already discussed ad nauseam. See here, here, and here for examples of why this is wrong, doesn't matter, or is being misstated." and then just sort of ignoring that person's response after that.

Then again, it isn't the job of any of us to necessarily educate strangers which reminds me of the story of the little girl on the beach with the starfish.*

In this situation, I'm not so sure the perspective of the adult is the wrong one.

I don't know. 🤷‍♂️

*The original of this is of a young man rather than a little girl and more wordy and a lot more meditative, as written. While a little unfair to the original author, I kind of prefer one version or another of the counterfeit/adaption.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. At this point until the court case starts or an injunction is issued we are all just repeating the same posts. I hope that there is some new news soon but until then we have to wait and hope the court rule the way we want.
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
tissandtully said:
He’s just done many more reprehensible things and this was the line just shows it’s all fun until they come for them or something they like
Click to expand...
For a lot of people the economy is still #1. While they may have an opinion on these culture war issues (in a lot of cases Republicans agree with the Governor on them) those issues take a back seat to the economy which is still the top issue and usually followed by national security, immigration and crime too. So I think that’s why you see Republicans in the focus group quoted having a negative response to something detrimental to the economy. The other reprehensible things are culture war related and they may not even disagree with them.
 
sedati

sedati

Well-Known Member
The tactic is actually genius. They call it power to the people, but it's actually power to the person. Things are written in such a way that only one naysayer can bring about charges, firings, or worse. That person doesn't even have to be directly involved. And with such flimsy standards, most will go to the extreme trying make themselves beyond reproach and only take things to a more ludicrous extreme which is how you end up with people so afraid that someone will object to a book that they simply remove them all.
 
Stripes

Stripes

Premium Member
mkt said:
And now there are actual financial damages that can be added to any lawsuit.
Click to expand...
Disney can’t sue the state in federal court for monetary damages due to the sovereign immunity doctrine.

Highly unlikely that they sue the district for monetary damages. If they won, the money would primarily come out of their own pockets.
 
Last edited:
mkt

mkt

When a paradise is lost go straight to Disney™
Premium Member
Stripes said:
Disney can’t sue the state for monetary damages due to the sovereign immunity doctrine.

Highly unlikely that they sue the district for monetary damages. The money would primarily come out of their own pockets.
Click to expand...

They wouldn't be suing the state for monetary damages.

They'd add it to the existing lawsuit where DeSantis and the board members are being sued in their official capacities.
 
Stripes

Stripes

Premium Member
mkt said:
They wouldn't be suing the state for monetary damages.

They'd add it to the existing lawsuit where DeSantis and the board members are being sued in their official capacities.
Click to expand...
They can’t sue DeSantis and the board members in their official capacities for monetary damages in federal court. They can only sue for injunctive relief.

They can sue the state and/or the district in state court for monetary damages.
 
networkpro

networkpro

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
Yes
tissandtully said:
Ahh, I bet the owners love this, they need to be doing more about it
Click to expand...

Speaking of owners, I'm glad I'm not a DVC participant as the potential for tax increases on their fractional ownership (as part of the yearly maintenance fees) is quite high as what money is spent on at what rate with the new board is a given.
 
JAB

JAB

Well-Known Member
Figgy1 said:
3 This was never about leveling the playing field
Click to expand...
The whole out-of-touch "leveling the playing field" claim is so tiring at this point.

If we picture the situation as a race, Disney's competitors have to all wear the same publicly-subsidized shoes. Disney had an arrangement where it got to choose its own shoes, but had to pay for them themselves.

In this scenario, "leveling the playing field" would be making Disney wear the same publicly-subsidized shoes. Instead what DeSantis and CFTOD are doing is taking away Disney's ability to choose its shoes while still making them pay for them. In addition, they're adding hurdles to the track, but only in Disney's lane.

That's not making things "fair," it's intentionally hindering one of the runners because they said something the race committee didn't like.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom