4/21: Return to Flash Mountain

[Al Lutz]

Rides that know who you are, What Monorails? More... Discuss it all here...

DIRECT ARTICLE LINK: MiceAge.com - A different look at Disney...

[Zoe Necrosis]

Wow, interesting news. It seems as though publishing this article may end up saving the Splash Mountain "screener" position, as a few people may look to May 3rd as a day to begin pusing the envelope.

[jcruise86]

Thanks for the excellent update, Al!

[dland_lover]

No picture screening for Splash Mountain?
That's one of the dumbest decisions I've ever heard of! They really don't care about kids, heck- adults, too, seeing these obscene acts? STUPID!

And, I don't really want the AA's to know who I am, and tweak the experience to me. I really don't. Roz, in Monster's Inc., is as advanced as I really care to see. I want the rides to remain classics, not gimmicks.

[sir clinksalot]

I think it's funny that they are comparing FL to CA in the "Flash Mountain" thing. California is VERY different from FL when it comes to things like that. Sure, you have the Spring Break crowd in FL, but they don't strike me as big time visitors to WDW.

CA however, with all of the locals is much different, and I'm sure boobie pictures will be showing up at the exit displays quite often.

Just wonder how many upset parents it's going to take before this is changed back.

[danyoung]

Nice update, Al. I have a couple of comments -

On the RFID thing, you said "A Resort guest would fill out a survey form prior to their arrival, and then that information would be downloaded onto the RFID tag embedded in their tickets."

It's actually much more likely that the information will be loaded into a database, and accessible when a code in the RFID tag triggers the computer to look up that info. Much less data flying around that way. I think the technology is interesting, but depending on how they enter and secure the data, it opens the door for someone to list his first name as, say, S***HEAD, and then enjoy seeing Fantasyland AA figures repeating that to him. We'll see.

And while I don't agree with DL taking away the screening position on the Splash Mountain photos, I really don't agree with you, Al, making this situation public. It's like a newspaper saying that a certain grocery store doesn't watch for shoplifters any more, and then speculating that once this information gets out shoplifting will most likely increase. Some information simply doesn't need to be made public.

[Katella Gate]

Honestly, at this point, what is there to say? The monorail fiasco in Tomorrowland, "Girls Gone Wild" in Critter Country, and price gouging in a smothered in a succulent Southern Sauce. I thought this stuff was gone from the park... perhaps it only went on hiatus.

I feel a real detachment from the Park. It's been coming for years now. I get far more pleasure looking at the vintage Disneyland photos in "Gorillas Don't Blog", "Daveland Blog", or "Yesterland" than I do visiting the actual park.

The fact that my last full admission Annual Pass only got two uses (day of issue, last day of valid use) is a real red flag.

[danyoung]

Sad to hear, KG. On the other hand, I can't wait to get out there again this July, buy a new annual pass (even though I live in Dallas!), and enjoy the parks as I always have.

[GrumpyFan]

Hmm... perhaps a solution to the removal of the photo editor/screener would be to post signs thru the queue about the legality of public indecency. Then randomly post a patrolman from the sherriff's office by the monitors and writing citations on the spot for those who decide to mis-behave. Crude? Yes, but effective too.

I hate to sound like a curmudgeon, but there was a time when people knew how to behave with decency and respect too others in public. It's a sad statement on our society that Disney had to have a person screening the photos in the first place.

[sir clinksalot]

Originally Posted by GrumpyFan

Hmm... perhaps a solution to the removal of the photo editor/screener would be to post signs thru the queue about the legality of public indecency. Then randomly post a patrolman from the sherriff's office by the monitors and writing citations on the spot for those who decide to mis-behave. Crude? Yes, but effective too.

That would kind of take away the point of cutting that position from a price perspective as the patrolman would most likely cost more than the CM checking pictures.

[KevinYee]

Originally Posted by danyoung

I really don't agree with you, Al, making this situation public. It's like a newspaper saying that a certain grocery store doesn't watch for shoplifters any more, and then speculating that once this information gets out shoplifting will most likely increase. Some information simply doesn't need to be made public.

The job of the press (including bloggers who are often called "citizen press") is to throw light on the situation. There are very few times when suppressing information is in the public's best interest (national security is one of those, however).

[Baloo]

good article but the question is


If the writer is so concern about the possible problems of people taking indecent pictures on Splash mountain why post a story on the net that is telling everyone that screenings will not be done anymore.

If it is true what he is saying and the number of "splashed away" pictures have decreased then why give the internet community an open invitation to do it now that the picture might actually be displayed?

I just do not see the point in AL releasing information like that although many journalist do tend to cross the line at what they report. Case in point all the recent news about the pirates taking over ships. Reporters basically telling everyone the ships are defenseless because all they carry are water guns.

[ni_teach]

Originally Posted by dland_lover

No picture screening for Splash Mountain?
That's one of the dumbest decisions I've ever heard of! They really don't care about kids, heck- adults, too, seeing these obscene acts? STUPID!

I predicted that is job will come back after a few parents complain about what the people behind them were doing.

[caesarboxfan]

I too think that the Splash Mountain story should not have run.

It's one thing to writing an article saying that Denny's is giving away free Grand Slams on a certain day. It's another when you're announcing that there are no security cameras in a department store.

I can imagine some people reading this article and saying "Wow, cool! We can do whatever we want on Splash Mountain now and get away with it!"

I think that the position will return, after the indecency complaints start coming in.

[danyoung]

Originally Posted by KevinYee

The job of the press (including bloggers who are often called "citizen press") is to throw light on the situation. There are very few times when suppressing information is in the public's best interest (national security is one of those, however).

First, I don't consider folks like you and Al as being "press" in the traditional sense - your job isn't the same as the average newspaper. While I'm not fond of actually surpressing information, I think there's a fine line between doing that and giving out information that can be harmful. I understand Al's desire to get this situation changed for the better, but in the process of writing about it he is also giving out information to the public that it doesn't really need to have. If this situation did indeed become a problem, then I can see writing about it. But to write about it before there is any problem, and to basically create the problem by writing about it, just doesn't seem like the best way to approach it.