ACE: Uncomfortable hotel like a concentration camp

...and the inaccuracies are:

-- sound of crickets chirping --
*** This post was edited by Absolutely Reliable 10/23/2003 9:18:42 AM ***

Anything "-itration camp" should ABSOLUTELY give you the idea of Nazi's killing Jews.

------------------
"I go out at 3 o' clock for a quart of milk and come home to my son treating his body like an amusement park!" - Estelle Costanza

I apologize for stating there were several inaccuracies. Most of your statements are simply opinions to which you are entitled, even though I disagree with most of them. You skillfully extracted just the right parts of the article and response to make your point. At the risk of generating another long epistle from you I will continue. I think you are a very talented writer, and I'm afraid my response will pale in comparison to the prose that will be generated.

I find your entire post distasteful and extremely hypocritical. You find a simple "pontitration camp" statement offensive but then think it is perfectly okay to encourage your readers to send an entire list of offensive comments to the editor, president, and publications director.

You inferred that pontitration camp referred to the camps in Germany where millions lost their lives, yet a simple google search with the words "concentration camp" generates quite a few responses, most of which refer to places other than Germany, including camps in the U.S.

You state that others apparently agreed with you, but in fact there was only one person, Bill Childs, who wrote a letter, and I'm beginning to think that Bill Childs and ARN&R are one in the same.

The article clearly says it was a nickname coined by a few attendees. The author is just reporting what was said by those attendees. There were over 200 people in attendance on that trip, several of Jewish descent, and no one took offense to it at that time.

The editor states "We are sorry that you found this comment offensive." "There was no intent by the author or event attendees to offend anyone with this comparison." How can you state this is not an acceptable apology?

Let's face it 99% of our readership didn't care. One person wrote a letter to the editor, then not satisfied with his response prompted you to post an article in ARN&R (if you are not one in the same). A few of your readers blindly followed your suggestions--several of them are not even ACE members, who never even saw the original article or the letter of apology. They only read your carefully extracted quotes. You may have prompted a few responses in your favor, but several have come in supporting the editor's comments as well, suggesting that you have gone overboard with your post.

The letter was printed, and so was an apology. I'm sorry you didn't like the apology, but that's all you're going to get. As far as ACE Publications is concerned its over, and your letter writing campaign isn't going to change a thing.

In response to Mr. Putz:

The editor did take responsibility. The letter was printed, and so was an apology.

I am curious as to what made you think this was a news item worthy of a link.

Not much more from me.

You've acknowledged that there were no substantive inaccuracies but that you disagree with the opinions -- that's fine, and I appreciate your honesty.

On the rest, very briefly:

- I think a straight-up and sincere apology would read very differently than what was published, which argued that it was not, in fact, an offensive comment. You think otherwise. That's cool.

- I know of at least one other letter sent to ACE at the time of the original article. Only one was published.

- We (and this was something written by multiple people, by the way, most ACE members) used the other metaphors in an effort to get ACE to recognize the problems with the original metaphor -- problems they failed to grasp with the original letter. Sometimes when a straightforward approach fails, something a little more emphatic is necessary.

- I think it's insulting to those who wrote in to say they "blindly" followed our lead. Would that we had such power.

- Feel free to post the full letter and response. I think it was a fair description of it, but am happy to have a discussion of that. At your request, I even did add to our original piece acknowledging that there was an apology in the response. In retrospect, it should have been there from the start.

P.S. In my Google search for "concentration camp," two entries out of the first thirty related to something other than Nazi camps. Those two related to the Japanese interment camps during World War II. I'm not sure that helps the cause of justifying the phrase.

[edit to add the P.S.]

*** This post was edited by Absolutely Reliable 10/23/2003 11:30:48 AM ***

Not to answer for Mr. Putz, but to state why I think it was a good idea to have posted this, it generates more interesting discussion than, say, what is your favorite new coaster that hasn't been built yet.

By the way, I think that the reference to concentration camp, whether Germany (the most famous), or anywhere else, was a mistake.

------------------
"I go out at 3 o' clock for a quart of milk and come home to my son treating his body like an amusement park!" - Estelle Costanza*** This post was edited by janfrederick 10/23/2003 11:46:54 AM ***

---

In response to Mr. Putz:

The editor did take responsibility. The letter was printed, and so was an apology.

I am curious as to what made you think this was a news item worthy of a link.

---

"Mr. Putz" is my dad. Don't patronize me.

I don't care what the editor did or didn't do, that's not the issue. The issue is that you, the club's secretary, came here and made excuses about how they're volunteers or whatever, and the implication that what was said was OK. I'm pretty sure that's what the rest of us find quite lame.

And why did I post this as news? Why the hell not? It's good reading and it's funny. I don't think I have to clear it by you first.

------------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog
Blogs, photo albums - CampusFish
What time does the water show start?

As someone who did write to ACE after the ARN&R story, I can say to ACE's credit that the response I received was prompt and courteous.

That said, the person who replied said that because I'm not an ACE member, I "obviously" hadn't seen the article. This isn't true, since I happen to date an ACE member (please stop all jokes now) and did in fact see and read that issue. It's silly of ACE to think that their magazine never leaves the hands of card carrying ACE members - and, if anything, could be a powerful recruiting tool.

The reply also did not apologize, but continued to defend the statement because it was being made in fun to lighten up an uncomfortable situation (I'm paraphrasing.)

I didn't share these thoughts with the person who replied, because I don't need to perpetuate some big email argument with someone I've never met - but as a non-ACE member who 'mindlessly' wrote a letter I thought I'd chime in.

Aha. Officially registered for ages, and a longtime lurker, and this is what it takes to bring me out into the open and bother posting. Prepare for long-windedness. First of all, I completely agree that the original "Pontitration" remark was thoughtless and shocking, but never corresponded with ACE about such merely due to the fact that I assumed it was a one-time dumb mistake. It was the editorial *reply* that I found horrifying, because it made an apology for offending Mr. Childs and then described ways that it was silly for him to be offended. This is *not* a real apology, sorry. See Michael Darling's comments above for a better description of why not.

As for an email I sent to ACE, I also received a response indicating that there was nothing wrong with the statement and there was no reason for anyone to be offended. I should state here that my reply from the author was extremely prompt and very polite. Since much of this message will be criticism at ACE leaders, I do want to state that they should be commended for responding to irate letters and not ignoring them.

Specifically regarding several statements by Mr. Seifert here that should be addressed:

"The article clearly says it was a nickname coined by a few attendees. The author is just reporting what was said by those attendees."

Let's not deflect the blame here. If I overhear a neighbor making a tacky joke, should I post it here and then claim it isn't my problem because I'm just repeating it? No. There are often vaild journalistic reasons to quote from sources, even if offensive, to help carry a story or make a point. Randomly throwing a concentration camp joke in an otherwise well-done article about roller coaster trips does not qualify.

"There were over 200 people in attendance on that trip, several of Jewish descent, and no one took offense to it at that time."

Maybe they didn't. Several Jewish friends of mine were even more offended by the quip than me. And a couple just sort of shrugged it off, not too concerned. I think it's safe to say that some people don't care, and it's safe to say some do. What is certain is that there were people offended, and you should be concerned with whether *those* people feel an acceptable apology was made, whether or not you or those on the trip feel it's necessary.

"One person wrote a letter to the editor, then not satisfied with his response prompted you to post an article in ARN&R."

This is patently ridiculous. I was horrified by the original reference, I merely didn't have the pills to write in and complain about it, because I like to avoid arguments. The fact that Mr. Childs was the only (?) person to originally write in does not mean no one else was offended by it. I find his choice particularly brave, and feel more than a little ashamed on behalf of myself and others for letting him be the only person discussing this with the RC staff initially. But no more. Let me assure you right here and now, many friends of mine felt the original phrase was unacceptable, and many felt the so-called apology was unacceptable. Please don't insult my intelligence by claiming that I "blindly followed" some satire website. I have the capacity to form my own coherent thoughts. I sent what I believe was a well-conceived letter expressing my distress over the issue because the editorial reply in RC offended me and showed a complete lack of touch. I was happy to send my letter through ARN&R because their article was sent to me and I was pleased to note that I could forward my note to several ACE officials and the website all at once, but I would have been perfectly willing to spend the extra three minutes to ship everything off to everyone individually. As for the statement "[l]et's face it 99% of our readership didn't care," I am deeply curious from where this factoid arrives. I don't think any of us have that figure. There certainly seem to be plenty of people who agree with me. Do you really think all of them bothered to write in or post a message in a forum expressing disapproval? More importantly, do you really think it's wise to claim that 1% of your membership doesn't matter, even assuming that only 1% are offended (I think it's likely it's a lot more.)?

Additionally, I think if you really look closely at that Google search for "concentration camp," you'll find that most of the references are indeed to German camps where people were tortured and killed. There are, as you state, other references, which I pointed out in my own email to ACE a few days back. Certainly there have been and still are other concentration camps that are not related to those in Germany during WWII. I do not think it's a whole lot more appropriate to compare a bad hotel to any other camps where people are imprisoned and often put to death for having the "wrong" appearance or beliefs. Those put to death in South American nations in the 70's for having different political ideas from the leadership, or citizens of the US who were of Japanese descent imprisoned in the US during the war probably don't think humor involving their situation is too funny, either. Of course, I haven't checked with them; it's possible they think it's hilarious, but I have my doubts.

Attention ACE: An excellent way to end this problem would be to print something in the next magazine that says "Some people were offended by this comment. We apologize." No waffling, no descriptions of why it's stupid for us to be offended. No defensive postings indicating that anyone who was offended was a mindless imbecile led astray by a "tacky website." Have a little more respect for your readership. Those responsible for the comment and editorial reply are not bad people, but that doens't mean they didn't make a bad mistake.

Craig

PS-If anyone really thinks it's inconceivable that anyone could provide a grammatically correct, well-thought complaint letter regarding this matter to ACE without tagging along a silly satire site like a yapping chihuahua, I am happy to share my email to ACE with you. You can decide if I'm blindly following a website like a moron or if I have half a brain and can form complete outraged thoughts all by by lonesome. ckirkland@snet.net*** This post was edited by 10/23/2003 2:21:33 PM ****** This post was edited by 10/23/2003 2:48:56 PM ***

Wow... good thing you're not the PR guy for the club.

You clearly don't care that anyone, member or not, found the apology worse than the offense, and your added insults to all who were offended here is seriously not helping.

------------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog
Blogs, photo albums - CampusFish
What time does the water show start?

I see Mr. Seifert has deleted his latest post that seemed to be implying simple moron ACE members like myself did not have opinions that ACE leadership figures are concerned with. Sorry, though...I saw it. And yes, I found it highly condescending and insulting. Much of the rest of this won't entirely make sense to anyone reading because of the deletion, but here's what is left after my edits:

Thanks for standing up for our opinions, Jeff. (Putz). Actually, I don't mind if Mr. Seifert continues to post opinions showing a complete lack of concern over the opinions of simple, feeble, and worthless ACE members such as myself. Even if ACE members disagree with my opinions and those of the Mr. Childs, I'm assuming they like to think that their leadership has some concern that their thoughts are remotely respected.

My initial thought upon reading Mr. Seifert's latest, now-deleted, missive was to quit ACE immediately, but I have reconsidered (sorry, I didn't mean to get your hopes up). If you only have twelve people sending you letters telling you that concentration camps jokes are wrong, then you obviously need each and every one of us in your organization to be your Jiminy Crickets and explain such things to you for the foreseeable future. I'm not going to leave just so you can be more comfortable and not be pestered by contrary opinions. Espcecially not contrary opinions from 12 of us who are just so incredibly stupid that we don't matter to you.

Sorry, I'm not over it, and you're not remotely encouraging me to be with your attitude.

[Edits for excessive harshness of response, clarity with previous post now gone, and...oh, yeah, a typo.]

*** This post was edited by Wedge Antilles 10/23/2003 3:24:49 PM ****** This post was edited by Wedge Antilles 10/23/2003 3:28:10 PM ***

I'm starting to wonder if 2003, the 25th year of ACE, is going to be remembered as the "beginning of the end". When I joined ACE in 1999, I did so to get the two publications, ACENews and RC, in the hopes that I would be treated to articles about my favorite subject, and maybe a few inside rumors I could get nowhere else...

Well, one out of two isn't bad.

I also hoped that events would be held that I could attend and get to know fellow RC enthusiasts. Having attended all of two events (hey, I live in Seattle and don't have gobs of money) I can say that... well, at least the magazines have cool pictures in them.

Now, no matter what you may think of them, ACE DID handle a rather tragic incident earlier this year with grace and professionalism. And they promptly got told by several major parks that "You know what? You're not welcome here if you're going to break the rules" (See the CP letter)

Did ACE learn anything from this? I think it's too early to say, BUT, if the reaction to the RC "pontin-" comment is any indication... they clearly have a long way to go.

Bottom line? Be sensitive to others opinions and don't try to justify your comments with thin evidence. No one on this board would fogive me if I used the "N-word" in response to a comment... even if I were to follow it up by saying, "well, I'm african american and I can use that word... " I hardly think that RC magazine would print an article using it either.

I am by no means a PC obsessed person, but I DO recognize that certain words have connotatoins to certain groups of people and I try very hard not to offend because that's the way I would like to be treated.

That's about all I have to say on that...

-Escher

Hey Jeffrey,

Next time, instead of deleting your post, why not have some cojones and simply apologize? It's not that difficult: "Ooops, I was stupid to insult you, I'm sorry."

I might be wrong, but I bet you didn't delete it because you actually felt sorry, but because you caught too much flak.

Or am I wrong?

------------------
"I go out at 3 o' clock for a quart of milk and come home to my son treating his body like an amusement park!" - Estelle Costanza

From a thoughtful and sensible post by escher26:

"Now, no matter what you may think of them, ACE DID handle a rather tragic incident earlier this year with grace and professionalism."

Indeed. This is why I didn't think any of this was beyond hope or anything. I didn't think to mention ACE's reaction to the Stark Raven Mad incident in any of this, but it's certainly true that that reaction was a very good one. I particularly appreciated Mark Davidson's editorial in ACE News regarding such. ACE was exceptionally quick, professional, and thorough in reacting to that particular issue. That's part of the reason why this one is so surprising to me.

Additionally, I think I was clear in my post and in my letter to ACE publications that I don't think the people who let this current comment and editorial reply through are evil or racist, they simply made a mistake and refuse to admit it, and they are simply unwilling to accept that anyone who was offended has any right to be so. I also stated that I appreciated the fact that anyone replied at all, and politely, when I mailed my complaint. And then an ACE exec puts up a forum reply dismissing my opinion, after which he deletes it so no one will see his condescending comments.

I also like to think I'm not a PC-bandwaggoner...as I stated in my original email to ACE, words are really just words to a certain degree. Attack comedy by Carlin and Pryor, and websites like The Onion, is going to make use of potentially offensive words and ideas to challenge people and their own beliefs. This was not the case with RC magazine. It was a cheap joke.
*** This post was edited by Wedge Antilles 10/23/2003 5:19:01 PM ***

I just want to add a few comments here. Bill/ ARN&R mentioned that at least one other person sent in a comment on the original article. I can verify that I did indeed send in an email commenting on the inappropriateness of the comment made in the original article, and that if they really felt it was necessary, that they certainly could have found a much better way of putting it in than the manner that they did. No matter how bad Pontin's may have been, it doesn't compare to a real concentration camp.

But for some reason, they never seemed to feel that my email was worth following up on, and I never received any sort of reply from them. I then ran off a hard copy and mailed that with a note saying that I had hoped to receive some sort of reply to the original and mailed it in case they had missed it. No reply. I guess maybe since I'm just sort of a "common man/ generic member" instead of a webmaster or someone with influence they didn't feel I was worth the time. I hope that's not the case, but at this point, who knows.

In any case, it's bad enough that they made an inappropriate comparison that at the very least is tacky, and to far to many is considered highly offensive. (maybe those who don't think so should try asking people who were interred in camps or had family members that were) And this kind of a wimpy, white-washing excusing of it is pitiful. It's bad enough that they didn't bother to respond to my original comments. It's worse that they refuse to really apologize or accept that they could have been out of line. Worse still is when the secretary comes on here, again excuses the inappropriateness of it, then blasts those that disagree with him. And they wonder why ACE has such a reputation? Gee, I don't.

Add on to all of that ACE's whole image consciousness about the Holiday World incident, but complete lack of any real action in regards to it (oh, except a letter. whoopee). And I'm sure that many of us in ACE can name or point out several flagrant violators in the organizaion that still seem to be around. It makes you wonder if they ever actually do discipline or remove members, or if it's just lip service. It's all got me really thinking I'm not renewing my membership at this point.

------------------
Sometimes it's up. Sometimes it's down.
But with God, life is one thrill ride that you'll never regret being on.
*** This post was edited by Sir Willow 10/27/2003 10:16:34 PM ***

wow im glad i read all of this.i was already considering not renewing my ace membership based soley on the attitude ive seen from the clubs leaders over the past six months. this just confirms my belief that i want nothing to do with the club anymore.its seems that alot of people i know feel tehs ame way. if its not the overpriced events then its the attitude. lately it seems more like the attitude is pushing me ayaw.i dont need a club of pompous jerks to organize spending a day at a park with some friends. seems that alot of otther people are seeing this also.

ttd

TopThrillMagster said:

"...the person who replied said that because I'm not an ACE member, I "obviously" hadn't seen the article."

Hmmm. Interesting. That should come as a surprise to their advertisers [which includes me] since pass-along info, on which rates are partially based, is included on the ACE Advertising Rate Card:

MAGAZINE AND NEWSLETTER READERSHIP

ROLLER COASTER! and ACE NEWS are read by all members of ACE plus "pass along" readers such as their family members, neighbors, visitors and business associates. ACE publications are also read by industry personnel such as marketing and buyer representatives of roller coaster manufacturing companies, and by members and executives of the IAAPA.

mOOSH [waiting to see if my ad reappears in the next ACE News]

------------------
The only 2004 Coaster Calendar still available, plus holiday & all-occasion cards. All at S&D Greetings.

*** This post was edited by Mamoosh 10/27/2003 10:47:00 PM ***

I was on the ACE Europe trip in question.

I would not have described Pontins as a Concentration Camp myself. I've stayed in even more budget accomodation than Pontins (after all, the room I was in did have running water, even if it was only cold).

However, I can see why some people might describe it as that.

Furthermore, I can understand why some other people might take offense at the comparison.

The fact is that no matter what you do, controversial comments of any form are liable to offend a small percentage of people reading them. Personally I can't say I have any interest in reading bland articles with nothing controversial at all.

Are these same people going to seek an apology for the fact that the second Lord of the Rings movie has a title offensive to Americans after September 11th 2001?

Regards,
Richard

----------------
http://www.bannister.org/coasters/

Please... the title of a fantasy story written 50 years ago has nothing to do with 9/11, and certainly it's ridiculous to compare it to the slaughter of millions of Jews.

------------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog
Blogs, photo albums - CampusFish
What time does the water show start?

"The fact is that no matter what you do, controversial comments of any form are liable to offend a small percentage of people reading them."

This is no excuse for publishing something stupid and then handling it the way they did. Also, "controversial" comments always offend people; isn't that the meaning of the word? And the percentage isn't always small. Wouldn't you agree by the posts here that perhaps the people offended weren't a "small percentage?"

------------------
"I go out at 3 o' clock for a quart of milk and come home to my son treating his body like an amusement park!" - Estelle Costanza