State of UOAP & General Theme Park Fandom

[Lucky Planet]

Maybe some find it annoying, some scareactors have fun with that though. In my years we actually took some of the crosses and added them as a part of the houses. That's not over the top though or something i'd consider to be too bad.

If you're in a house though, you don't get it too bad. It's when you're on the streets that people start to become obsessive over your performance. They'll wait, specifically for your cast to come out to see you or someone else. They're FFP holders so they're at HHN often. This is the vast minority, but they are the type to seek out minimum wage scareactors real names on facebook. I know it's happened to me.

As a fan of HHN two of my favorite things are watching people get scared ( which is hilarious) and listen to and identify the songs playing around the park.
But as a FFP holder what makes me paranoid of sitting by the zones is for actors thinking you are a creep for sitting there. I never sit by zones for hours or anything and i always make sure to avoid staring at the actors because i know thats weird, or I focus on shazam to find the song ino, but still it always makes me wonder if actors hate for people to sit there. Regardless if you are actually creeping or not. As a FFP some of my favorite memories of all time are of people getting scared.
There have been times when you can tell some actors are like "wtf dude" which is also uncomfortable because im just minding my own business, im not even looking at anybody.

 

[s8film40]

As a fan of HHN two of my favorite things are watching people get scared ( which is hilarious) and listen to and identify the songs playing around the park.
But as a FFP holder what makes me paranoid of sitting by the zones is for actors thinking you are a creep for sitting there. I never sit by zones for hours or anything and i always make sure to avoid staring at the actors because i know thats weird, or I focus on shazam to find the song ino, but still it always makes me wonder if actors hate for people to sit there. Regardless if you are actually creeping or not. As a FFP some of my favorite memories of all time are of people getting scared.
There have been times when you can tell some actors are like "wtf dude" which is also uncomfortable because im just minding my own business, im not even looking at anybody.

I can identify with this. I feel like being a Bill and Ted fan in itself already has a stigma. I find myself being overly cautious in how I approach that fandom. I'm quite a bit more reserved than some of the more "obsessive" fans. I've been amazed though at how embracing those performers are to even the craziest fans. Like I've said I've seen a lot of things that made even me as a fan cringe and I've always seen them show nothing but appreciation towards their fans. I think everyone shows their appreciation in different ways and they seem to be very understanding of this. Although I'm sure they have some seriously wacky stories to tell each other in private.

 

[fryoj]

I believe this is totally besides the point; this isn’t about others thinking the time and energy we put into our passion is too much it’s about toxic fandom. Let’s not dilute this and play “both sides” here.

Actually, this is a discussion about the state of theme park fandom. Every level of fandom is open for discussion here. Who are you to decide where the line is? If you only want it to be about your definition of toxic fandom, change the thread title and define the rules. But as the post isn't set up that way... I've seen highly regarded people on this board interacting with actor's personal Twitter pages and going to the HHN shows repeatedly and had in show interactions that I'd say Uni wouldn't approve of considering the current topic. Do I care? no. But I'm sure there would be a lot of people that would consider that obsessive and toxic. Is the actor's approval the line? Is there a certain amount of interaction that is ok, and beyond that not? There are people that would think all of us spending time on this board is obsessive. I doubt anyone here would really agree with that, but who are we to say they are wrong?

 

[Lucky Planet]

Talking about rides and theme park additions and park land to me is not toxic or obsessive. It is interesting and fun and informative.
Talking about technological advances in the rides and properties for new rides is not toxic at all. I dont think so. I love reading everyones posts in here.
I learn so much about something i love which is the parks.

 

[s8film40]

Talking about rides and theme park additions and park land to me is not toxic or obsessive. It is interesting and fun and informative.
Talking about technological advances in the rides and properties for new rides is not toxic at all. I dont think so. I love reading everyones posts in here.
I learn so much about something i love which is the parks.

I agree with you, but just like interactions with performers this side of fandom has its dark side as well. This forum does an outstanding job of filtering that out but there are countless online discussions involving taking photos over walls or in back stage areas, scouring website code for unreleased info, spreading info from confidential surveys and employee information, etc. Additionally building on rumors of soft openings has been particularly challenging for theme park operators recently. I think if I were to look at that type of theme park fandom from an operators perspective I could definitely classify it as toxic, perhaps even more so than the issues with interactions with performers which while they come off as creepy are more than 99% of the time totally harmless.

 

[Imperius]

Taking photos over a wall of construction is in no way the same as stalking an actual person IMO while they are working in the park.

 

[Brian G.]

Actually, this is a discussion about the state of theme park fandom. Every level of fandom is open for discussion here. Who are you to decide where the line is? If you only want it to be about your definition of toxic fandom, change the thread title and define the rules. But as the post isn't set up that way... I've seen highly regarded people on this board interacting with actor's personal Twitter pages and going to the HHN shows repeatedly and had in show interactions that I'd say Uni wouldn't approve of considering the current topic. Do I care? no. But I'm sure there would be a lot of people that would consider that obsessive and toxic. Is the actor's approval the line? Is there a certain amount of interaction that is ok, and beyond that not? There are people that would think all of us spending time on this board is obsessive. I doubt anyone here would really agree with that, but who are we to say they are wrong?

Just wanted to chime in here -

I don't know what the line is, and I'm not one to draw it for anyone; but from my eyes, anything that is done that is not malicious to one self or anyone, should not be viewed as toxic - regardless of how involved they are in it.

That applies to any fandom.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Actually, this is a discussion about the state of theme park fandom. Every level of fandom is open for discussion here. Who are you to decide where the line is?

Look at the title of the thread, the opening post, and the several posts between @Legacy and I.

 

[Jones14]

If you’re able to vote, the performers don’t find gifts cute. Trust me. They’re also instructed not to accept them, even from kids.

 

[WAJAS]

Just wanted to chime in here -

I don't know what the line is, and I'm not one to draw it for anyone; but from my eyes, anything that is done that is not malicious to one self or anyone, should not be viewed as toxic - regardless of how involved they are in it.

That applies to any fandom.

I agree. It may be “weird” to those on the outside, but it isn’t really toxic until it becomes malicious.

 

[Nick]

If you’re able to vote, the performers don’t find gifts cute. Trust me. They’re also instructed not to accept them, even from kids.

I've worked with casts who got worked up because they *didn't* receive a duck from the duck lady. Nobody takes anything else as you said, instructed not to take anything, but the ducks are the one thing even management will turn their heads to. It's known by now that it's gonna happen.

All other things are annoying though and you'll likely be chased off by the scareactor or just flat out ignored.

 

[Lucky Planet]

How did the duck lady manage to get everyone on board? Maybe no one knows but i find that interesting.

 

[Nick]

How did the duck lady manage to get everyone on board? Maybe no one knows but i find that interesting.

It's seen as a thank you. At the same time, she just goes about her business while at HHN. You'll see her every once in awhile, but she's just enjoying the event, not being the type that's overly obsessive about any certain characters. When she gives the duck, it's a quick hand-off and back to doing our scare (because she knows there's a job to be done).

She gives out the ducks to as many people as she can towards the end of the run - they're very small, rubber ducks.

 

[Frank Drackman]

It happens a lot, actually. Random guests start seeking out the real names of scareactors then year after year start pleading for their location the moment auditions are over so they can “see them again.”


There’s definite degrees. My concern isn’t passionate fans; it’s obsessive ones. There’s a clear difference.

I think I get where you are coming from and I really feel for these kids. I imagine they do not get paid a lot, I mean that in say take a Tim Tracker (I am not social media versed so I picked one example I hear about on here) he (or they) are building their brand, I guess they understand it is all about the path they have chosen...but Scareactors, I mean I know it is a passion for the ones that apply year in year out...heck, there are a couple I know that stand out to me...but I would never try and figure out their real name nor try and run into them in real life.

I just do not get what social media (other than the world keeps getting smaller) is doing to society....don’t get me wrong...FB was an amazing tool for my family during a recent hurricane...it is just more the stuff we use to blame on the news...the serial killer that has to one up their idol....just seems an odd new world to me and I think there are similar traits at work here or something....the kid crush an an actress maybe harmless when there is a slim chance of meeting the character...but the local kid playing a role, well, maybe more have access to their portfolio as you need the social tools for your career...but it exposes you to local ‘fans’.

As a fan of HHN two of my favorite things are watching people get scared ( which is hilarious) and listen to and identify the songs playing around the park.
But as a FFP holder what makes me paranoid of sitting by the zones is for actors thinking you are a creep for sitting there. I never sit by zones for hours or anything and i always make sure to avoid staring at the actors because i know thats weird, or I focus on shazam to find the song ino, but still it always makes me wonder if actors hate for people to sit there. Regardless if you are actually creeping or not. As a FFP some of my favorite memories of all time are of people getting scared.
There have been times when you can tell some actors are like "wtf dude" which is also uncomfortable because im just minding my own business, im not even looking at anybody.

Yet I often see the po po people watching the zones too....yes, there is a bench by the Disaster area where I often see a couple of people camped out with their popcorn....I get it, I am a people watcher....I spend time in airports essentially doing the same thing....just watching people, seeing the ebb and flow of it all....I just do not see how the actors themselves would pay much attention to the outskirts of the zones....isn’t that for the handlers to worry about?

HHN25, we went a lot....my daughter was always routing for Jason...she had actors fistbumb her (they initiated)....guess that is when I realized they pay attention to...I just figured for them it would just be a blur of faces...

 

[Nick]

I just do not see how the actors themselves would pay much attention to the outskirts of the zones....isn’t that for the handlers to worry about?

First of all, there are no "handlers". There's the stage managers and that's about it on the streets. As to how the actors pick up on certain people... there's 34 nights of the event. It's really not too hard.

Now people just sitting on a bench isn't something I take as weird. If they like the zone, i'm glad you like it. It's once they start to feel entitled and behave a certain way towards the scareactors. Almost as if they're already friends so it's fine for them to mess with them.

 

[fryoj]

Just wanted to chime in here -

I don't know what the line is, and I'm not one to draw it for anyone; but from my eyes, anything that is done that is not malicious to one self or anyone, should not be viewed as toxic - regardless of how involved they are in it.

That applies to any fandom.

I don't disagree, but you do run into the question of what is malicious. I'm sure the people obsessing over actors and trying to find their real names and other jobs don't think it is malicious. They, hopefully, don't mean harm, but to the actor who may feel they are being stalked, it would feel completely different. Personally, I feel it comes down to the affected person's consent. But even that is a gray area as an employee of a company doesn't always feel like they have the right to do or say what they want while on the job.

Look at the title of the thread, the opening post, and the several posts between @Legacy and I.

Both the thread title and the mod note in the first post reference general fandom. That covers a wide variety of subjects including this board as we are pretty much all fans on some level. My post was a reply to someone else talking about how this level of fandom is viewed from the outside. I don't see how it doesn't apply to this overall discussion.

 

[Legacy]

I'm surprised that there even needs to be any sort of delineation of what "toxic" or "unacceptable" behavior toward theme park employees is.

Asking for employees' full/real names to follow them on SM - Unacceptable (really)
Investigating for the full/real name of an employee if you don't have it - Unacceptable
Seeking out employees with the sole intention of "watching" them as individuals and not as part of a performance - Unacceptable and absolutely toxic (and yes, there is a difference)
Engaging with employees beyond what the employee finds comfortable - Unacceptable and toxic
Engaging with employees in a manner or to an extent that interferes with employees' ability to perform their job - Unacceptable


Everyone is different. Everyone has different expectations. The above instances, however, should be universally accepted as crossing a definite line between appropriate and inappropriate interactions. Also, it's important to recognize that EVERY THEME PARK EMPLOYEE IS A PERFORMER PERFORMING A ROLE. Performer and employee are interchangeable terms here. Even Matt Korn, Customer Relations Extraordinaire, was playing the role of approachable AP Holder representative. That big doofy grin everyone gives guests walking through the turn-style is part of an act. It may be easier for some who enjoy their job more, but just like we have to be approachable and friendly and agreeable at our jobs, they have to be even more so.

I'm sure that first "rule" is a bit jarring, so let me explain. Universal (except with the exception of Water World, evidently) does not present their performers as performers (refer to my previous post). The reason for this is because "Universal" is the uniformed brand presented. The portfolios of individual performers isn't on display because it's not about the individual in a lot of these roles. Universal doesn't care about the "brand" or "prestige" of the individual any more than IHOP cares about how many Instagram followers their hostess has. Performers are filling a functionary role in a theme park. It's a job. They're not friends. Asking for their real or full name also encroaches into the last two "rules" about making employees uncomfortable and interfering with their work. Even if that particular employee doesn't mind it, a guest who does this is absolutely toeing the line.

Inevitably, someone is going to bring up other performers (TV and movie specifically). There is some validity in that. However, if the individual isn't searchable in IMDB or the role isn't found on Google, it should accepted as a lost cause because (to my previous point) if Universal wanted this information widely available they could make it so. Figuring out the real name of an employee shouldn't require an image search and facial recognition software. If it's not easy to find maybe they don't want people to know.

Here is a disappointing truth to keep in mind - For "featured" theme park performers, theme park shows and local theater productions (maybe an indie flick or commercial) will be their entire body of work. Wayne Brady is an exception, not a rule. Because of this, they have a vested interest in being friendly to everyone because if a guest complains that an employee was being a dick (right or wrong), that employee can lose their job and becoming persona non grata in Orlando. If an employee loses a job a one theme park, it puts them on uneasy footing at the others. The "brand" they need to be build is being nice; not being famous.

For the rank and file performers (scareactors and parade performers), it's a part-time job. Some of them are lawyers and teachers and bartenders. A lot are college students with other part-time jobs. A small (very small) percentage actually do heavy community theater work, but the vast majority (upwards 98%, I'd wager) do not have a brand or portfolio to build.

Working in a theme park is just like any other job that requires direct engagement with customers. They are REQUIRED to be nice and friendly and affable when they are working. They also have a vested interest in not being a dick on social media because, as we've seen numerous times, people's online personas are linked to perceptions of them on the job. Seeking out theme park employee's online essentially requires them to be "on-stage" 24-7. Look at Mike Aiello, who has made himself extremely approachable online as an extension of his job. In that capacity, he posts information and tidbits about what's coming. But when he posts about Orlando City or his new home, there will ALWAYS be some response asking about next year's HHN. That is someone essentially telling Mike to "do his job" when he's not at his job.

Imagine: A guest goes to Denny's. The waitress is friendly and smiling. Towards the end of the meal, the guest asks for the waitress' full name. The waitress (who thinks this is inappropriate but is concerned about tips and doesn't want a possible complaint) obliges. The guest goes home, finds the waitress on social media, and starts inundating her with questions about when her next shift is and what the specials are, and seeing where else she might work.

This is wildly inappropriate. We should all agree with that (and if you don't think that, or want to defend it, congrats on your addition to my "Don't be friends with this person" list). There is no difference between the waitress and the theme park employee. To say, "Well, I'm just a fan of Denny's food" doesn't justify it.

 

[ThemeParks4Life]

Imagine: A guest goes to Denny's. The waitress is friendly and smiling. Towards the end of the meal, the guest asks for the waitress' full name. The waitress (who thinks this is inappropriate but is concerned about tips and doesn't want a possible complaint) obliges. The guest goes home, finds the waitress on social media, and starts inundating her with questions about when her next shift is and what the specials are, and seeing where else she might work.

This is wildly inappropriate. We should all agree with that (and if you don't think that, or want to defend it, congrats on your addition to my "Don't be friends with this person" list). There is no difference between the waitress and the theme park employee. To say, "Well, I'm just a fan of Denny's food" doesn't justify it.

Something similar happened to a family member of mine recently. She was working at her store in the morning, and a much older customer asked what time she got off of work. This seemed like friendly banter, but when her shift was over later that day, he was there waiting for her. She didn't even know who this guy was and freaked out! This behavior is unacceptable and disgusting. Whether the person has good intentions or not, this causes paranoia for the employee and comes across as stalking.

 

[SeventyOne]

Just wanted to chime in here -

I don't know what the line is, and I'm not one to draw it for anyone; but from my eyes, anything that is done that is not malicious to one self or anyone, should not be viewed as toxic - regardless of how involved they are in it.

That applies to any fandom.

To play devil's advocate--I don't think there was anything malicious in guest behavior toward Matt Korn. But, based on Universal's actions since, it seems likely their conduct cost him his job.

Guests who sing along with Thurl in the Stretch Room or dress up for Dapper Day aren't trying to disrupt the experience for other guests--they're trying to be part of the show instead of just watching it. To me, that's what makes it toxic, not their intent.

 

[s8film40]

I'm surprised that there even needs to be any sort of delineation of what "toxic" or "unacceptable" behavior toward theme park employees is.

Asking for employees' full/real names to follow them on SM - Unacceptable (really)
Investigating for the full/real name of an employee if you don't have it - Unacceptable
Seeking out employees with the sole intention of "watching" them as individuals and not as part of a performance - Unacceptable and absolutely toxic (and yes, there is a difference)
Engaging with employees beyond what the employee finds comfortable - Unacceptable and toxic
Engaging with employees in a manner or to an extent that interferes with employees' ability to perform their job - Unacceptable


Everyone is different. Everyone has different expectations. The above instances, however, should be universally accepted as crossing a definite line between appropriate and inappropriate interactions. Also, it's important to recognize that EVERY THEME PARK EMPLOYEE IS A PERFORMER PERFORMING A ROLE. Performer and employee are interchangeable terms here. Even Matt Korn, Customer Relations Extraordinaire, was playing the role of approachable AP Holder representative. That big doofy grin everyone gives guests walking through the turn-style is part of an act. It may be easier for some who enjoy their job more, but just like we have to be approachable and friendly and agreeable at our jobs, they have to be even more so.

I'm sure that first "rule" is a bit jarring, so let me explain. Universal (except with the exception of Water World, evidently) does not present their performers as performers (refer to my previous post). The reason for this is because "Universal" is the uniformed brand presented. The portfolios of individual performers isn't on display because it's not about the individual in a lot of these roles. Universal doesn't care about the "brand" or "prestige" of the individual any more than IHOP cares about how many Instagram followers their hostess has. Performers are filling a functionary role in a theme park. It's a job. They're not friends. Asking for their real or full name also encroaches into the last two "rules" about making employees uncomfortable and interfering with their work. Even if that particular employee doesn't mind it, a guest who does this is absolutely toeing the line.

Inevitably, someone is going to bring up other performers (TV and movie specifically). There is some validity in that. However, if the individual isn't searchable in IMDB or the role isn't found on Google, it should accepted as a lost cause because (to my previous point) if Universal wanted this information widely available they could make it so. Figuring out the real name of an employee shouldn't require an image search and facial recognition software. If it's not easy to find maybe they don't want people to know.

Here is a disappointing truth to keep in mind - For "featured" theme park performers, theme park shows and local theater productions (maybe an indie flick or commercial) will be their entire body of work. Wayne Brady is an exception, not a rule. Because of this, they have a vested interest in being friendly to everyone because if a guest complains that an employee was being a dick (right or wrong), that employee can lose their job and becoming persona non grata in Orlando. If an employee loses a job a one theme park, it puts them on uneasy footing at the others. The "brand" they need to be build is being nice; not being famous.

For the rank and file performers (scareactors and parade performers), it's a part-time job. Some of them are lawyers and teachers and bartenders. A lot are college students with other part-time jobs. A small (very small) percentage actually do heavy community theater work, but the vast majority (upwards 98%, I'd wager) do not have a brand or portfolio to build.

Working in a theme park is just like any other job that requires direct engagement with customers. They are REQUIRED to be nice and friendly and affable when they are working. They also have a vested interest in not being a dick on social media because, as we've seen numerous times, people's online personas are linked to perceptions of them on the job. Seeking out theme park employee's online essentially requires them to be "on-stage" 24-7. Look at Mike Aiello, who has made himself extremely approachable online as an extension of his job. In that capacity, he posts information and tidbits about what's coming. But when he posts about Orlando City or his new home, there will ALWAYS be some response asking about next year's HHN. That is someone essentially telling Mike to "do his job" when he's not at his job.

Imagine: A guest goes to Denny's. The waitress is friendly and smiling. Towards the end of the meal, the guest asks for the waitress' full name. The waitress (who thinks this is inappropriate but is concerned about tips and doesn't want a possible complaint) obliges. The guest goes home, finds the waitress on social media, and starts inundating her with questions about when her next shift is and what the specials are, and seeing where else she might work.

This is wildly inappropriate. We should all agree with that (and if you don't think that, or want to defend it, congrats on your addition to my "Don't be friends with this person" list). There is no difference between the waitress and the theme park employee. To say, "Well, I'm just a fan of Denny's food" doesn't justify it.

You’ve managed to put an awful lot of people in the “toxic” category including even much of the staff of this very forum.

I also think you’re dead wrong on Universals reasoning for not supplying actors names. It’s to protect the integrity of the characters for children, this has always been the case in the theme park industry. If you’re not a child this simply doesn’t apply to you. At the same time they’re not going to announce it during a show or post out front in view of children.

I think one another thing to add to this is we are going back and forth talking about true performers and scareactors. These are very different categories. A scareactor has more in common with a ride operator than a stage performer. Someone who is entering the acting field is looking for this type of thing and expects and hopes to build a following. Scareactors are often just high school kids looking for something fun and different to do for a month. They’re not really prepared to handle this sort of thing and often don’t really know where to draw the lines themeselves.