Please don't boot me over this other wise your letting me know I'm getting to you.
It has nothing to do with getting to me or anyone else. It has to do with making noise and cluttering up valid forum topics with crap. No one wants to read it and it lowers the quality of otherwise valid discussion. Hence, the Terms Of Service (Wow, been a while since we had to pull that link out :) )
Again. Let it go.
Sorry to pick on Holiday World, but what about the t-shirts that Paul posted on negative-g.com? The t-shirts that said "My son is a credit-whore," and "My dad is a credit-whore." Not exactly very family-friendly out of the context of an enthusiast event.
The ultimate problem is defining what is offensive. Is it bad language? Is it provacative images? Is it political or lifestyle speech that puts down another person or group? Is it language that refers to something else completely, like the Big Johnson shirts, or the "Got Wood?" shirts. I wouldn't want to be put in charge of that.
I think SF has the right intentions here, I just don't see how it will be enforced across the board in a fair and equitable manor.
Also "don't talk on your cell phone telling your friend how much you hate your f****** job while checking restraints" and "do not smoke if you are not on break" should be in there as well. ;)
"Enforce the rules" is not NEARLY forced enough on the employees sometimes. If management doesn't care if a guest smokes in line then why should the employees?
The apathy starts at the top. I have seen other guests do more to enforce the "no smoking in line" policy more than the employees. ;)
*** Edited 10/19/2006 1:31:57 PM UTC by coasterqueenTRN***
coasterqueenTRN said:The apathy starts at the top. I have seen other guests do more to enforce the "no smoking in line" policy more than the employees.
...and the no line cutting as well.
Don't know that I've ever seen a guest ask another guest to put a shirt on though...so maybe the "ignore it and it will go away" credo has its limitations? :)
Anticipated enforcement levels:
September..."who cares, I am SOOO over this job"... :)
*** Edited 10/19/2006 2:40:48 PM UTC by rollergator***
I'm not sure where I stand on this. I like to see a fair playing field, with rules enforced so everyone can have a good time. But, in this day and age, that's not always easy. Yes, you arre paying a lot of money to get into the park, but you ARE warned that you can be asked to leave if you break park rules. It's not like it comes out of the blue.
I'm gonna go watch the Maverick webcam now...
Are they having that big of a problem?
Does make me wonder why Q-Bot sales are SO strong when the lines only exist for those WILLING to wait anyhow...
"Pay $20 and this new age technology device will do all your cursing for you."
I always get the 'shocked' look when I wear that shirt (doesnt help that it's also fire engine red). I wonder if that would be considered 'offensive'?
--who notes that the pocily does not specifically mention double entendre
Six Flags says no more line jumping, no more disorderly behavior, no more smoking in non-smoking areas, no more offesnive clothing. They don't say there'll be any less of it, just no more. :)
What always cracks me up about these Six Flags press releases is they seem to be expecting everyone to say "well gee, aren't you wonderful." What they're proposing is nothing earth shattering, just what most parks have already been doing for years. But they make it sound like they just invented sliced bread.
How long it will be before we see a smoke-bot, a shirt-bot or a curse-bot?
"Pay $20 and this new age technology device will do all your cursing for you."
LMAO! I can see the little messages pop up on the Bot now... "Hey s***head, it's your turn to ride Ka! Get your f****** *** to the queue, NOW!
These rules affect the "good" people as well as the "bad" ones. They end up offending and affecting good people who are just there to have a good time. Theyre gonna end up losing more money than making it because they will get people who will go elsewhere. People wanna have a good time and not be constantly worrying if what theyre doing is going to get them in trouble.
The last thing a struggling park needs is a bunch of silly rules and employees running around like police trying to enforce them. That really turns people off.
They should have the bare minimum rules to keep the park safe and beyond that just let people do what they will. There is no way they can make their park some wishy washy, warm n fuzzy, disney-like world. People that want to cause trouble will and there will always be someone doing something that will offend somebody, its just life.
If you dont like something you see, just look the other way, ignore it and enjoy your time at the park. Dont let the little things bug you.
The only reason they use the family friendly slogan is so they can have an "official" reason for such rules without saying that theyre just doing it to keep people from doing stuff that offends them personally.
I hate to tell them but these rules are gonna scare away the families too.
I agree that maybe the offensive shirt slogan is going a little overboard, and truthfully, I have no idea how they are even going to enforce this, but I can see them trying to monitor for proper attire. I don't think they are trying to be kill joys here.
Shapiro wants SF to be the alternative to Disney. Will it ever happen? In the real world, probably not, but you got to give them credit for trying.
Sure theyre is if youre comfortable and it saves you the trouble of not having to bring extra clothes. There doesnt need to be some imaginary line where being shirtless/barefoot is acceptable/offensive.
"It's a health and safety issue, to protect you, them and other guest."
If its so unhealthy/unsafe then why do people go shirtless/barefoot everywhere else and you dont see anybody getting hurt/sick? Thats a convient excuse to cover up for the fact that these guys have those rules simply because they dont like the sight of shirtless/barefoot people and they need some "official" reason to ban it that works so they wont seem like theyre being prejudiced or discriminatory. I dont need someone else to make rules to protect my saftey, I can do that myself.
" I know most, if not all rides require shirts and shoes. Many of the shows also require them also. And food concessions in many areas require shirts and shoes, which is sometimes mandated by state health department regulations."
That whole health dept thing is a myth, the only rules they have for dress apply only to employees of such establishments.
"I agree that maybe the offensive shirt slogan is going a little overboard, and truthfully, I have no idea how they are even going to enforce this, but I can see them trying to monitor for proper attire. I don't think they are trying to be kill joys here."
How or more importantly who decides what clothing/slogans on clothing is "offensive" or "proper"? Those rules are rather vague and basically leave it up to the personal discretion of the individual employees. I think they need to be more specific.
"Shapiro wants SF to be the alternative to Disney. Will it ever happen? In the real world, probably not, but you got to give them credit for trying."
They should just let Six Flags be Six Flags and not try to make it like Disney because it is NOT Disney nor was it ever meant to be.
As for the shirtless, I couldn't really care less if someone wants to walk around without a shirt on. But it's just like when you go to a gym, you wear a shrit when you use the equipment. My guess is that someone feels that you should wear a shirt when riding the rides for similar reasons.
And SF isn't the only park that requires you to waer shirts and shoes on rides. I know that PKD does it also, only I don't know how often it's enforced, but I have seen it done.
And I agree with you on how and who will determine what attire is offensive. That is going to give them nothing but headaches if they don't establish a level playing field. I wish them luck on that.
And finally, I believe you are right, Six Flags isn't Disney and I don't think they ever will be either.