The Morality and Politics Surrounding Visiting Specific Theme Parks

[GooseOnTheLoose]

One such approach rather than a total ban that could have been taken was that when someone raises a topic that could become a multi-post debate on a “moral” or “political” aspect is that a simple post by a moderator could be made along the lines of “we recognise the importance of this issue. This thread is primarily for discussion of X. Please have further discussions about this specific issue in this different location”. The issue is still raised with direct context, the thread doesn’t then descend into repeated similar discussions and there is a dedicated space to have those discussions clearly signposted.

I have taken what I believe is quite the pragmatic approach with my most recent post in the Six Flags Qidyyia thread, having checked with the team that it's permitted.

I have hidden the political elements behind a "spoiler" tag, and included a trigger warning for anyone who wishes to avoid "political content". Any further discussion about my post will most likely have to continue here.

I feel that this is a more cohesive compromise, than a complete silo and I hope it may be enough for you to not feel pushed out.

Six Flags Quiddiya

The only way this gets beaten is if the UAE decide to engage in a coaster war with their neighbours. Dont see Six Flags (the real one) going anywhere near the scale of this thing given their financial state in America. Disney? Not a chance. Universal? Slightly more chance than Disney but still...

towersstreet.com

 

[Craig]

The posts here show why raising such issues and having such discussions within context is important and having them not being relegated to a side thread that can easily be ignored.

This isn’t a side thread? This is a dedicated topic that appears in the same forum as one of the main reasons this topic was created - Six Flags Qiddiya. It appears in people’s new posts feeds just as any other topic does too:


If people choose to ignore the topic, that is completely their prerogative as an individual whether they choose to do so or not. I understand you personally may feel that it must be discussed in the same topic, but conversely may others do not feel that way. If people that want to have a discussion specifically about the park and avoid discussion on the political issues, they have a home for that - just as those that do want to talk about the political issues have a place too.

That doesn’t necessarily mean everyone is fully ignorant to it. Some may just want to avoid discussion altogether on theme park forum, whereas others may sometimes not have the headspace to delve into and read that discussion at certain times.

This forum will now have to consistently police “political” or “moral” on all relevant park and attraction threads and all aspects of said words and it is not clear who or how that will be done and what is acceptable or not. For example, a topic that easily and regularly descends into a “moral/political” minefield on here is disability provision for a ride/park.

Ultimately I don’t feel welcome in or see the point in a discussion forum community where people can’t freely raise relevant opinions within direct context on the issues of any park, attraction, event or incident in a lawful, reasonable, proportionate, relevant and respectful way.

One such approach rather than a total ban that could have been taken was that when someone raises a topic that could become a multi-post debate on a “moral” or “political” aspect is that a simple post by a moderator could be made along the lines of “we recognise the importance of this issue. This thread is primarily for discussion of X. Please have further discussions about this specific issue in this different location”. The issue is still raised with direct context, the thread doesn’t then descend into repeated similar discussions and there is a dedicated space to have those discussions clearly signposted

That’s precisely what we’ve done with the Six Flags Qiddiya discussion? We tried to allow both aspects of the discussion to continue, but it was clear off the back of the number of times that we’ve stepped in and the reports we received that that was no longer possible. As a result, we created this discussion to allow the debate to continue. As Goose has pointed out, where there is a need to reference things like the political situation in Saudi Arabia for questions like “Why is there not more POVs/footage?”, then referencing it is fine.

As you’ve mentioned disability/ride access pass discussion, that’s happened with that too. As disability discussion was being discussed substantially in general discussion topics, an individual topic was created to discuss things in depth. Disability discussion is still touched on in the General topics, but for more detailed discussion, that can take place in the dedicated topic.

There is nothing we will be able to do which will be 100% satisfactory to everyone. We’ve just done what we feel is the best to meet everyone in the middle.

With the greatest of respect, if you don't see the point, or feel welcome, move on.

I certainly don’t feel we need to be directly asking people to move on. I appreciate the feedback that golgactic is making and I’m more than happy to respond to it to explain why we have done what we’ve done.

 

[rob666]

...I certainly don’t feel we need to be directly asking people to move on. I appreciate the feedback that golgactic is making and I’m more than happy to respond to it to explain why we have done what we’ve done.

And there I was, trying to defend the forum, and putting my foot in it, again.

My bad.

The original poster had made the comment, twice.