complaint letter
you guys are wrong.
disneyland is a PRIVATE company. as such, they have all sorts of rules everyone who enters their gates.
now, PRINCESSSHEL does have a point. she has the right to complain to a private company on who or what goes on in their property.
now will it do any good? maybe. maybe not. but it's still her right to complain. once we all lose this right, that's the time to leave...
again, she has the right to exercise her free speech by writing to the mall property owners.
disneyland is a PRIVATE company. as such, they have all sorts of rules everyone who enters their gates.
now, PRINCESSSHEL does have a point. she has the right to complain to a private company on who or what goes on in their property.
now will it do any good? maybe. maybe not. but it's still her right to complain. once we all lose this right, that's the time to leave...
what happens when you bring your kids to the mall and there is a person wearing a shirt saying something you do not approve of. who are you going to write to then?
VIP Member
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 6,155
From: Alaska
Car Info: R.I.P 03 aspen white wrx
that’s what i don’t understand about gays... the decent ones should have stood up to them about wearing crap like that
i mean they want us to except them for who they are but its hard when those few gays walk around being retarded and total attention ****** about it when its clearly not appropriate.
but whatever, i personally would have wrote on my under shirt something like "silly ***got dicks are for chicks" and offended them all.
edgar,
i mean they want us to except them for who they are but its hard when those few gays walk around being retarded and total attention ****** about it when its clearly not appropriate.
but whatever, i personally would have wrote on my under shirt something like "silly ***got dicks are for chicks" and offended them all.
edgar,
VIP Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,531
From: Bike Lane
Car Info: Black 2003 WRX Sedan
princesschels has a point about how the clothing might have been inappropriate at such a place like Disneyland or anyother vacation resort where a ton of children are going to be, but i fail to see how that incident has anything to do with a "gay day"
i understand that princesschels has nothing against homosexuals (even though its funny how almost everyone that talks about anything homosexual always puts out the "i dont hate gays, and i even have friends that are gay" disclaimer) but would you feel the same if it was a regular day or even made a fuss about it?
i understand that princesschels has nothing against homosexuals (even though its funny how almost everyone that talks about anything homosexual always puts out the "i dont hate gays, and i even have friends that are gay" disclaimer) but would you feel the same if it was a regular day or even made a fuss about it?
VIP Member
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 6,155
From: Alaska
Car Info: R.I.P 03 aspen white wrx
Originally Posted by DLUX WRX
princesschels has a point about how the clothing might have been inappropriate at such a place like Disneyland or anyother vacation resort where a ton of children are going to be, but i fail to see how that incident has anything to do with a "gay day"
i understand that princesschels has nothing against homosexuals (even though its funny how almost everyone that talks about anything homosexual always puts out the "i dont hate gays, and i even have friends that are gay" disclaimer) but would you feel the same if it was a regular day or even made a fuss about it?
i understand that princesschels has nothing against homosexuals (even though its funny how almost everyone that talks about anything homosexual always puts out the "i dont hate gays, and i even have friends that are gay" disclaimer) but would you feel the same if it was a regular day or even made a fuss about it?
but what do i know i wasnt there, zoeb can you tell us more?
edgar,
VIP Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,531
From: Bike Lane
Car Info: Black 2003 WRX Sedan
Originally Posted by zumnwrx
i think that maybe there was ALOT of gay/offensive shirts walking around... versus seeing one or two in the whole day...
i say send the letter in. but talking about "gay day" is kind of pointless.
iClub Silver Vendor
iTrader: (25)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 15,494
From: Participating in some Anarchy!
Car Info: 2005 LGT wagon
Originally Posted by Daredevil
its called free speech. if you don't like see'ing those things in PUBLIC.... then go live in russia... (nothing against russia)
what happens when you bring your kids to the mall and there is a person wearing a shirt saying something you do not approve of. who are you going to write to then?
what happens when you bring your kids to the mall and there is a person wearing a shirt saying something you do not approve of. who are you going to write to then?
Disneyland is not a PUBLIC place, and as such, can restrict what it's patrons wear & say.
Same with the mall.
And isn't writing a letter of disapproval expression of speech?
Do you think it's acceptable for children to view matters that are adult in nature?
Oh, and Homer, that's why I support Disney.
Last edited by FW Motorsports; Oct 3, 2005 at 08:03 PM.
Explain what 'spitters are quitters' means. Also dont go to Disneyland anymore if you dont like it, they throw letters in the trash just like every other self-respsecting organiation that doesnt have to cater to the whim of a minority of its customers.
Originally Posted by NZO
Explain what 'spitters are quitters' means. Also dont go to Disneyland anymore if you dont like it, they throw letters in the trash just like every other self-respsecting organiation that doesnt have to cater to the whim of a minority of its customers.
Here, use this... :x (courtesy of the online complaint generator).. http://www.pakin.org/complaint/
Half of me was reluctant to write this letter out of concern that Disney may be one of those organizations who do eccentric things for the sole purpose of gaining attention. But given Disney's track record, I have concluded that its announcements, like opium, hashish, or alcohol, keep the canaille in a trance and oblivious of reality, so I've decided to proceed. For practical reasons, I have to confine my discussion to areas that have received insufficient public attention or in which I have something new to say. Disney hates people who have huge supplies of the things it lacks. What it lacks the most is common sense, which underlies my point that Disney's cop-outs have created a nutty universe devoid of logic and evidence. Only within this universe does it make sense to say that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape. Only within this universe does it make sense to reduce us to acute penury. And, only if we build a sane and healthy society free of its destructive influences can we destroy this silly, pugnacious universe of its and defy the international enslavement of entire peoples. It is similarly noteworthy that we must criticize the obvious incongruities presented by Disney and its understrappers. Only then can a society free of its hypersensitive inveracities blossom forth from the roots of the past. And only then will people come to understand that the concepts underlying its contemptible, impertinent contrivances are like the Ptolemaic astronomy, which could not have been saved by positing more epicycles or eliminating some of the more glaring discrepancies. The fundamental idea -- that the heavens revolve around the Earth -- was wrong, just as Disney's idea that it is a model organization is wrong.
I don't see how Disney can build a workable policy around wishful thinking draped over a morass of confusion (and also, as we'll see below, historical illiteracy), then impose it *****-nilly on a population by force. I'm not saying that it can't possibly be done but rather that I recently heard Disney tell a bunch of people that it is omnipotent. I can't adequately describe my first reaction to this notion; I simply don't know how to represent uncontrollable laughter in text. Imagine a world in which Disney could engage in the trafficking of human beings whenever it felt like it. Most people want to be nice; they want to be polite; they don't want to give offense. And because of this inherent politeness, they step aside and let Disney help rapacious fugitives evade capture by the authorities. We no longer have the luxury of indulging in universalist, altruistic principles that, no matter how noble they may appear, have enabled the worst types of condescending proponents of colonialism I've ever seen to propound ideas that are widely perceived as representing outright vigilantism.
Ugly moochers who make bargains with the devil might not recognize the incongruities in Disney's slurs, but Disney claims that truth is merely a social construct. That claim illustrates a serious reasoning fallacy, one that is pandemic in its put-downs. Then again, a well-respected professor at a nearby university, writing with the dispassionate objectivity that is a precondition of all scientific knowledge, has recently concluded that one can predict on empirical grounds that by the next full moon Disney will acquire power and use it to indoctrinate dictatorial marauders. For proof of this fact, I must point out that we can divide its personal attacks into three categories: offensive, uncivilized, and resentful. Disney is capable of only two things, namely whining and underhanded tricks. Some addlepated, corrupt peddlers of snake-oil remedies are actually considering helping Disney make it virtually impossible to fire incompetent workers. How quickly such people forget that they were lied to, made fun of, and ridiculed by Disney on numerous occasions.
The following theorem may therefore be established as an eternally valid truth: Stubborn deadbeats are born, not made. That dictum is as unimpeachable as the "poeta nascitur, non fit" that it echoes and as irreproachable as the brocard that Disney had previously claimed that it had no intention to prevent me from getting my work done. Of course, shortly thereafter, that's exactly what it did. Next, it denied that it would impose satanic new restrictions on society just to satisfy some sort of sick drive for power. We all know what happened then. Now, Disney would have us believe it'd never ever violate strongly held principles regarding deferral of current satisfaction for long-term gains. Will it? Go figure. My view is that I do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Disney. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I get it off our backs. Disney's reasoning is circular and therefore invalid. In other words, it always begins an argument with its conclusion (e.g., that embracing a system of diabolism will make everything right with the world) and therefore -- not surprisingly -- it always arrives at that very conclusion.
Throughout human history, grumpy, merciless blackguards have always been mawkish. So it should come as no surprise that Disney craves more power. I say we should give it more power -- preferably, 10,000 volts of it. I have two words to say about Disney's harangues: overweening poppycock. That's all I'm going to say in this letter, because if I were to write everything I want to write, I'd be here all night.
Half of me was reluctant to write this letter out of concern that Disney may be one of those organizations who do eccentric things for the sole purpose of gaining attention. But given Disney's track record, I have concluded that its announcements, like opium, hashish, or alcohol, keep the canaille in a trance and oblivious of reality, so I've decided to proceed. For practical reasons, I have to confine my discussion to areas that have received insufficient public attention or in which I have something new to say. Disney hates people who have huge supplies of the things it lacks. What it lacks the most is common sense, which underlies my point that Disney's cop-outs have created a nutty universe devoid of logic and evidence. Only within this universe does it make sense to say that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape. Only within this universe does it make sense to reduce us to acute penury. And, only if we build a sane and healthy society free of its destructive influences can we destroy this silly, pugnacious universe of its and defy the international enslavement of entire peoples. It is similarly noteworthy that we must criticize the obvious incongruities presented by Disney and its understrappers. Only then can a society free of its hypersensitive inveracities blossom forth from the roots of the past. And only then will people come to understand that the concepts underlying its contemptible, impertinent contrivances are like the Ptolemaic astronomy, which could not have been saved by positing more epicycles or eliminating some of the more glaring discrepancies. The fundamental idea -- that the heavens revolve around the Earth -- was wrong, just as Disney's idea that it is a model organization is wrong.
I don't see how Disney can build a workable policy around wishful thinking draped over a morass of confusion (and also, as we'll see below, historical illiteracy), then impose it *****-nilly on a population by force. I'm not saying that it can't possibly be done but rather that I recently heard Disney tell a bunch of people that it is omnipotent. I can't adequately describe my first reaction to this notion; I simply don't know how to represent uncontrollable laughter in text. Imagine a world in which Disney could engage in the trafficking of human beings whenever it felt like it. Most people want to be nice; they want to be polite; they don't want to give offense. And because of this inherent politeness, they step aside and let Disney help rapacious fugitives evade capture by the authorities. We no longer have the luxury of indulging in universalist, altruistic principles that, no matter how noble they may appear, have enabled the worst types of condescending proponents of colonialism I've ever seen to propound ideas that are widely perceived as representing outright vigilantism.
Ugly moochers who make bargains with the devil might not recognize the incongruities in Disney's slurs, but Disney claims that truth is merely a social construct. That claim illustrates a serious reasoning fallacy, one that is pandemic in its put-downs. Then again, a well-respected professor at a nearby university, writing with the dispassionate objectivity that is a precondition of all scientific knowledge, has recently concluded that one can predict on empirical grounds that by the next full moon Disney will acquire power and use it to indoctrinate dictatorial marauders. For proof of this fact, I must point out that we can divide its personal attacks into three categories: offensive, uncivilized, and resentful. Disney is capable of only two things, namely whining and underhanded tricks. Some addlepated, corrupt peddlers of snake-oil remedies are actually considering helping Disney make it virtually impossible to fire incompetent workers. How quickly such people forget that they were lied to, made fun of, and ridiculed by Disney on numerous occasions.
The following theorem may therefore be established as an eternally valid truth: Stubborn deadbeats are born, not made. That dictum is as unimpeachable as the "poeta nascitur, non fit" that it echoes and as irreproachable as the brocard that Disney had previously claimed that it had no intention to prevent me from getting my work done. Of course, shortly thereafter, that's exactly what it did. Next, it denied that it would impose satanic new restrictions on society just to satisfy some sort of sick drive for power. We all know what happened then. Now, Disney would have us believe it'd never ever violate strongly held principles regarding deferral of current satisfaction for long-term gains. Will it? Go figure. My view is that I do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Disney. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I get it off our backs. Disney's reasoning is circular and therefore invalid. In other words, it always begins an argument with its conclusion (e.g., that embracing a system of diabolism will make everything right with the world) and therefore -- not surprisingly -- it always arrives at that very conclusion.
Throughout human history, grumpy, merciless blackguards have always been mawkish. So it should come as no surprise that Disney craves more power. I say we should give it more power -- preferably, 10,000 volts of it. I have two words to say about Disney's harangues: overweening poppycock. That's all I'm going to say in this letter, because if I were to write everything I want to write, I'd be here all night.
Write the letter if nothing else you'll get free tickets and possibly other stuff from them. Disney is insanely sensitive about their image and you'll likely get a pretty good haul. Nothing will change, but you'll get free crap.


