Enthusiast ban list is real
I agree that the list should not / cannot be published, but maybe a list showing X number banned for Cedar Fair parks, X number banned from Six Flags parks, X number banned from Holiday World, Etc.... It may give the list more meaning when people see that 550 people were banned from Cedar Point or 200 from Kennywood. Some people in this thread seem to be having a hard time believing that the list is real.
Finally, you said that the parks are sharing the lists. Will all of the parks deny entrance once one park has put someone on it's list?
------------------
2003 Parks: Cedar Point, SFWOA, Kennywood, PKI, MIA, SFGAM, SFKK and HW.
Still deciding where to go in 2004.
What does that mean? They have safety devices, they maintain safety devices. They have safety policies, they observe safety policies. They know certain people are breaking the rules, they ban those people.
Now, if a legal case comes up in the future the park can say, "hey look, we took every conceivable step to prevent said individual from riding." It lessens the parks contributal negligence (if I am remembering my law class correctly).
coasterqueenTRN said:
Do you think a park would ban a specific enthusiast JUST because they are on the list? Even if they didn't cause any trouble to or at that park specifically?Yes, Tina, I think they could, would, and even SHOULD. Trespassing on park property can easily become a *major problem* for the park should someone get injured or something....and these are individuals the park(s) have already deemed "unwelcome" for various reasons. No reason to allow them onto the property in the hope that they'll be well-behaved THIS time....
bill, unsure of the list of NAMES being published, but the REASONS for their banishment, IMO at least, should be made public....I don't see reasonable enthusiasts getting upset over *clearly warranted* decisions, and it'll make the parks' position(s) much more palatable....
------------------
Tact is for people not intelligent enough to comprehend sarcasm...;)
I also wonder how much GP's care about being banned. I would imagine most of them just go to the park once a year at most and it's not really a big deal to not have that opportunity. I'm not saying you shouldn't do it, just wondering how effective it is in discouraging other unsafe behaviour.
------------------
Be polite and ignore the idiots. - rollergator
"It's not a Toomer" - Arnold Schwartzenkoph
"Those who know don't talk and those who talk don't know." -Jeff
-'Playa
------------------
The scholar, the eternal question and a lot of stupid jokes. Celebrate Pancake Day 10/27. Check your local listings for events.
*** This post was edited by CoastaPlaya 10/15/2003 11:20:47 AM ***
*Side note, the park has contacted each of the individuals personally if they are on the list right? I guess that means I'm not a bad boy since I haven't received one. :) *
------------------
SWOOSH
MidwestInfoGuide.COM
MIZZOU-RAH!
I still buy a shirt now and then and I still wear them. Just not as much as I used to and that started before this season. If a person enjoys that part of the hobby then they should by all means do it and have fun. I know folks that do not wear them anymore because of the bad apples and wondered how many others also do not anymore. I tend to only wear items for the park I work at part time but that is because I am a shameless corporate shill and have no problem pimping out for the park.
It all boils down to personal choice. I think a person can be an enthusiast and not wear coaster gear but that is just my opinion. Coaster gear and coaster counts do not automatically make a person a good enthusiast.
Photo taking.
I am not sure that just because the park does not put up a sign saying you can not take pictures on a ride means that it is ok to. Personally Swoosh if I was you I would ask first just to cover your hinder (CYH) in the future. Just a thought because how does a Op watching you snapping away on the lift know that you secured the potential missle after leaving the chain?
Jim Wolgamuth
*** This post was edited by JWolg 10/15/2003 11:34:15 AM ***
Precisely. I'm really not sure I understand the reason some people feel it's necessary to know either who or how many people are on the list. What good will it do? It should not matter to enthusiasts or the 'GP.' As I've said before, anyone with a shred of common sense knows exactly what to do (or not to do) to remain off the list.
ApolloAndy said:
It's probably not a good idea to post a "# of people banned" type sign (for some reason I can't stop thinking about those McDonald's signs that say, "# of people served"). It's just not the kind of image you want to have for your park at the front gate.
------------------
-Mike Buscema
'No matter how skilled the designer is, every time we push the envelope we learn new things about coaster design.' --Dana Morgan
------------------
Also if the only place they are taking pictures is on the lift hill -- mainly just of "the view" why is that bad? I mean taking pictures during the actual ride is bad, but...
You have to draw the line somewhere objective... otherwise, you get arguments about "well, he took pictures on the ride, why can't I take them where I took mine", "I wasn't over the top of the lift yet", and you'll still see unsecured cameras flying when folks aren't ready for the first drop. I think their current rules are warranted and more enforceable.
------------------
Tact is for people not intelligent enough to comprehend sarcasm...;)
------------------
--Greg, aka Oat Boy
My page
"Friendship -- more lasting than love, more legal than stalking."
One concern that I have: the term "Zero Tolerance" has come up. Everytime I hear that I somehow wonder if a synonym for that is not "Throw Common Sense out the Window". Example... Schools that have a Zero Tolerance for weapons. Granted, Weapons do not belong in schools, but there have been stories (although few) of kids making a "gun" with their index finger and thumb finding themselves being suspended because of the "Zero Tolerance" policy.
Where I am going with this is...
It is my understanding that certain parks / park chains have a policy of "no cameras" on any rides. This includes ferris wheels and sky rides as well as the most intense coasters out there. I know I have used the old argument... "no lose articles mean no cameras as well (since they usually are not bolted to your skull and are therefore loose..." But it is not very hard to "forget" this when you are on a ferriswheel or other gentle ride (to borrow an RCT term). IF a park has a no lose article policy on all rides and IF a person were to snap a picture from a ferris wheel and IF a park would have a ZERO Tolerance... should this be enough to get you on the List? Personally, I don't think so. Common sense would say that this is worthy of a "reminder" of "That's not Permitted", but hardly worthy of a Ban for life. This is not the same as "the lift hill should be okay". Wrong.. .the lift hill is not okay... You are on a coaster and secured, keep your camera away.
Another example... "Don't Bounce The Birds" policy of parks like PKD on their Flyers, and Hersheypark on their Frontier Flyers. Those of us who are used to Knoebels Flyers know what snapping is. What if you say are on one of these "Don't Bounce / Don't Snap" flyers and you move the sail in such a way that you do get a bit of a bounce, though unintentional. You technically "broke the rule"... enough to get you on the List?
I guess my only concern with this is... how much of a Zero Tolerance is there, and how much common sense is being put forward? A person who unknowingly breaks a rule (the bouncing of the birds by accident, or the camera on the ferriswheel) is, to me, a different case than a person who is knowingly and carelessly breaking a rule (shooting POV videos or still photograps on coasters, a one click lap bar... though the ops in the station should catch this, unbuckling a seat belt during a coaster ride, knowingly endangering themselves and others, etc).
So, while no publishing of the List is needed, a clarification and perhaps publishing of the criteria of what will get you on the list would be a good idea. And don't say "Common sense". What is common sense to some is not common sense to others.
------------------
Half of the people surveyed agree, half disagree and another half are unsure.
*** This post was edited by SLFAKE 10/15/2003 12:16:13 PM ***
I doubt they're going to be banning people left and right; it's likely just a tool for cases they feel are dangerous or unrepentant.
Swoosh said:
Ok I saw the whole "taking pictures thingie" on rides is an offense that will get you on the list. Is this only where they have warning signs that say it is strictly prohibitted or is this all rides? The reason I ask, is that I do take pictures on rides occassionally, but only when there is nothing that says that I can't. Also if the only place they are taking pictures is on the lift hill -- mainly just of "the view" why is that bad? I mean taking pictures during the actual ride is bad, but... I don't know it just seems a little stringent if the person taking them is using common sense, but I guess that is the whole reason this list came into play, people were not using common sense.
Look on the back of your ticket or park pass in small letters it has the rules of the park. So yes they did tell you not to take pictures on rides with out a sign in line.
When will some people grow up?????
------------------
Half of the people surveyed agree, half disagree and another half are unsure.
*** This post was edited by SLFAKE 10/15/2003 1:09:08 PM ***
but the RULE for me at this point is that cameras are *presumed* to be off-limits unless cleared in advance
Hey! Common Sense!? I didn't know that was allowed in a "cameras on coasters" discussion.
Just because a sign doesn't say "no cameras", doesn't mean they're Ok.
Again, why do so few people understand this? The signs don't say not to kill people at the park (and I've certainly wanted too). The signs don't really warn against sex on rides either (sadly, this has crossed my mind too ;) )
I understand that GP may not be aware, but anyone into coasters enough to want those on-ride pics should probably know better. That's what I find most astounding....followed closely by all the excuses for why it was ok.
I know of very few parks/rides that truly allow or encourage on-ride photography of any kind (especially coasters). Most of the time it's at enthusiast events (just another of the things they *give* enthusiasts).
Just some thoughts from someone who enjoys taking park photos :)
------------------
www.coasterimage.com
Dorney Park Visits in 2003: 17
*** This post was edited by Lord Gonchar 10/15/2003 12:45:25 PM ***
Do they publish their lists of who is not allowed on casino property?
Do they feature the existence of these lists in advertising?
The only reason that I know about the casino lists is that I saw it on a Discovery Channel documentary. Like what Jeff alluded to, I'd bet (pun intended) that the casinos share information on which in-duh-viduals to beware of. I'm sure that the parks' overall modus operandi will be very similar.
Later,
EV
-----
"Everybody has desperate days of quiet questioning.
Everybody has times when they feel like they don't fit in."
- Color Theory, So Many Ways, 2001
From what they say in the movie, it's not the casinos' list but the gaming commission's. The reason the casino's enforce the rule is that they themselves can get in trouble for letting the unsavory folk listed into their establishment.
------------------
Scott W. Short
scott@midwestcoastercentral.com
http://www.midwestcoastercentral.com
You must be logged in to post
