Recent Debates/Problems/Etc on Forum

[bobbie68]

Hi I am new to this forum and as I posted yesterday I have had been treated harsh on other forums in for different things. I think the way everyone was handling things here in an open discussion and admitting to things was great. I am even seeing apologies and then doesn't happen often on other ones. I don't see a lot of defensiveness when things are brought to a posters attention and that makes working things out good. I think having discussions and different opinions is fine and expected as long as everyone respects others opinions even if you don't agree. I can see that on this board. I look forward to more discussions on one of my favorite places to visit.

The mods on this board seem to be very good at communicating. I have been on one where the some mods can be really mean. There is no need to. We are all here for the same great reason.

Have a great day!

 

[Lucky Planet]

Since apparently I'm public enemy #1 for some folks (one of which, to my knowledge I've literally never interacted with), here's where I stand:

Yea, I debate people. I see opinions I feel are ridiculous or hyperbolic and I'm gonna counter them. I've never personally attacked anyone. I've never thrown insults around, or threatened anyone. I'm opinionated as hell, but I am IRL as well. But I also don't take anything here seriously...at all. It's theme parks people. We're talking about rollercoasters and dark rides, not life and death. As far as I remember I've never reported anyone to the mods, because again, it's theme parks and the internet. People get heated on the internet sometimes. It's no skin off my back, unless you get abusive or threatening to someone.

It also gets tiring as hell to come to a site that is normally fun and see pages upon pages of "this sucks and Universal is doomed" or "SCREENZ", which is why I've audibly complained about it in the past. It's why I generally stay out of threads for things that don't interest me/I think look bad unless I have something relevant to say or I actually experience the thing. I think Avatar land is a great big pile of crap, but outside of when I actually went to see it, I don't step foot in the thread. Because I know a lot of people really like it, and who am I to mess up their thread?

I also find it hilarious that all this started over me saying "F&F is a bad ride, but normal people aren't gonna hate it as much as y'all do". Apparently that statement is fanboyish or something? I dunno.

Their thread? Their thread? so threads belong to the superfans only?
is that what the real problem is? that "haters" or people posting negative comments shouldn't bother posting? because they dont belong?

 

[Lucky Planet]

I usually get the idea someone doesn't like it after it's been posted the first time. The rest is noise.

that noise can be equal with overly positive comments. or blind defending of a brand or a company
sometimes it feels people arent even defending the ride, but they are just defending the honor of the universal company.... almost like a team of lawyers defending a client lol

 

[Scott W.]

Their thread? Their thread? so threads belong to the superfans only?
is that what the real problem is? that "haters" or people posting negative comments shouldn't bother posting? because they dont belong?

You know that’s not what he meant. Personally, I probably bang heads with @JungleSkip more than any other user here but debate is good for the forum. Just because I don’t agree with something in one thread, doesn’t mean I’m not liking his posts in a different thread and he’s a great member who has a massive bank of information that he readily shares.

They’re sometimes about 10 different threads going at once and you can’t take these things personally.

We’re all here for the same reasons.

 

[Lucky Planet]

 

[Nico]

Edit: Forget it.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Hey y'all, with HHN28 in the rear view mirror I want to take some time to see how everyone's feeling about the forums and such. Myself and the mod team are always looking for input and feedback. Thanks!

 

[WAJAS]

As always, it’s a great experience here! I can’t think of anything that stands out at the moment, but I’ll be sure to tell you guys when I do.

Thank you to all the mods and admins for your continued support of the site! I think I speak for all of us when I say we’re extremely grateful!

 

[Viator]

I would agree to that. It felt quieter than prior; and I commend the mods for putting up with our insanity.

 

[GadgetGuru]

This isn’t a problem, but a personal observation.

It seems like a lot of activity on the forum is due to a handful of threads that grow to hundreds of pages each.

Personally, I find newer threads, with fewer posts, more approachable than the older threads that have hundreds of posts. I’ve definitely lost track of the discussion on some of the longer threads and it’s made it really hard to contribute to them.

 

[Brian G.]

This isn’t a problem, but a personal observation.

It seems like a lot of activity on the forum is due to a handful of threads that grow to hundreds of pages each.

Personally, I find newer threads, with fewer posts, more approachable than the older threads that have hundreds of posts. I’ve definitely lost track of the discussion on some of the longer threads and it’s made it really hard to contribute to them.

There is obviously no way to really stop threads from growing unless we cease discussion altogether, but I do appreciate you mentioning this.

It's this user experience that causes the staff to be on top of threads, especially when it's to make sure topics don't get too off-topic. 400 pages can be daunting - and not every user visits every day. If they're a week-to-week visitor, they have to catch up with 20 pages sometimes. Imagine if 2 of those pages are just silly nonsense? I know this was a glaring issue we had in the past, and I think we've found the proper balance since then - but just wanted to make sure this reason was recognized as to why we do what we do.

 

[Lucky Planet]

everything has been pretty smooth. cant think of anything for feedback.

 

[Happytycho]

There is obviously no way to really stop threads from growing unless we cease discussion altogether, but I do appreciate you mentioning this.

It's this user experience that causes the staff to be on top of threads, especially when it's to make sure topics don't get too off-topic. 400 pages can be daunting - and not every user visits every day. If they're a week-to-week visitor, they have to catch up with 20 pages sometimes. Imagine if 2 of those pages are just silly nonsense? I know this was a glaring issue we had in the past, and I think we've found the proper balance since then - but just wanted to make sure this reason was recognized as to why we do what we do.

This is a very specific question, but has any thought been given to changing up the threads about the site B expansion in Orlando?

Both threads are getting quite long at around 400 pages, and as more plans are released the distinction between what we want to happen and what is happening (blue sky vs. expansion threads) is becoming less and less clear. If the next plans show the outlines of buildings in the general shape of a park, that's factual information worthy of the expansion thread, but the most interesting discussion to have - what the buildings might contain - is completely speculative and blue sky.

I'm just wondering if at some point it would be worth considering dividing threads by topic (4th park, hotels, general resort/infrastructure, etc.) rather than stage of process or factual basis?

 

[Brian G.]

This is a very specific question, but has any thought been given to changing up the threads about the site B expansion in Orlando?

Both threads are getting quite long at around 400 pages, and as more plans are released the distinction between what we want to happen and what is happening (blue sky vs. expansion threads) is becoming less and less clear. If the next plans show the outlines of buildings in the general shape of a park, that's factual information worthy of the expansion thread, but the most interesting discussion to have - what the buildings might contain - is completely speculative and blue sky.

I'm just wondering if at some point it would be worth considering dividing threads by topic (4th park, hotels, general resort/infrastructure, etc.) rather than stage of process or factual basis?

Not until actual plans or announcements are made - or more concrete news/evidence comes out.

In regards to this specific question though: If the next plans show the outlines of buildings in the general shape of a park, that's factual information worthy of the expansion thread, but the most interesting discussion to have - what the buildings might contain - is completely speculative and blue sky.

The rule of thumb I intended was any discussion that stems from factual evidence should be discussed in the Expansion thread. So, those plans that came out last week - any discussion that derives from that blueprint should still stay with the Expansion thread. i.e. Parking Garage vs Parking pavement, transportation possibilities, how many parks could feasibly fit... etc. Once we get into theme, IP's, and such, is when the discussion should be tabbed to Blue Sky.

The reason for the separation is to avoid the "Why this IP belongs" discussion that cluttered up the thread originally. The Blue Sky thread was created as a way to have people speculate with "no wrong answer" and avoid further clutter.

 

[GadgetGuru]

There is obviously no way to really stop threads from growing unless we cease discussion altogether, but I do appreciate you mentioning this.

It's this user experience that causes the staff to be on top of threads, especially when it's to make sure topics don't get too off-topic. 400 pages can be daunting - and not every user visits every day. If they're a week-to-week visitor, they have to catch up with 20 pages sometimes. Imagine if 2 of those pages are just silly nonsense? I know this was a glaring issue we had in the past, and I think we've found the proper balance since then - but just wanted to make sure this reason was recognized as to why we do what we do.

Thanks for the great response! I feel like I’ve become less of a day-to-day visitor and more of a several-times-a-week visitor (no fault of anyone, life just got busy!), so keeping up has been challenging for me at times. Most of the mods’ Twitter accounts have been great signals for when something big happens and when I can expect lots of discussion on the forums

EDIT: building on the above, the more vague the thread is (Attendance decline, Site B), the harder it is for me to keep up. That’s definitely to be expected though.

 

[Andysol]

Can we get a Wicker Man Coaster thread?

 

[RevFreako]

Can we get a Wicker Man Coaster thread?

Only if you tell us what you think the layout will be.

 

[IOAGuy]

This isn’t a problem, but a personal observation.

It seems like a lot of activity on the forum is due to a handful of threads that grow to hundreds of pages each.

Personally, I find newer threads, with fewer posts, more approachable than the older threads that have hundreds of posts. I’ve definitely lost track of the discussion on some of the longer threads and it’s made it really hard to contribute to them.

This happens to me a lot and I have to force myself to read back a few dozen pages so I can at least follow the latest discussion but seeing a thread with 400+ pages is discouraging.

 

[Nick]

I get what @GadgetGuru is saying about some threads being intimidating. If I can't be near the boards for a few days because of work or something, I fall behind real quick and can take quite a bit of time to catch up.

The UOR Expansion, Potter Coaster, and 4th Park Threads are all at or around 400 pages. I think a good solution to this "problem" (and this is just my personal opinion) is to let threads like Potter continue since that ride will be open next year, but to close a thread like the UOR Expansion thread and create a Part 2, with the first post being a summary of all the concrete, factual information we currently have. I actually think this is also a very good time to do that as well with the recent filings on the land.

We have split threads in the past (Hogsmeade, Diagon Alley). The Diagon Alley - Part 2 thread was at 424 Pages in 2014 when we created a Part 3. The original Hogsmeade and Diagon Alley threads look like Brian had to cut them in the merger due to how old they were and their size.

That's just me though. It comes down to what @Brian G. thinks is best.

 

[IOAGuy]

Just look at the HHN 29 Speculation thread. It's already 8 pages deep and it started yesterday.

Edit: which is good, it's nice to know that the boards are active but I left that thread on Page 2.. most of it is, what others have said before me, just noise and I'm not gonna sit and read through it all. Just hope I catch the trail again cause threads do go off base sometimes.