Rumors, Facts, and Lies....Al 5/9/06

[Chavez Ravine]

Originally Posted by jonvn

I was online before the internet was popular.

So you're saying you made it popular

[jonvn]

Oh yeah. It's all about me.

But before the internet was popular, there were local BBS systems, and things like Prodigy and AOL and the like. I helped write software that connected the various campii of the CSUC across the state of California. Very much a precursor to the software you are running right now, but entirely text based and command line driven.

But other than the point and click capability here, it was the exact same thing. Much like Usenet.

[ismael flores]

Originally Posted by ereed62

So is this going to be a clone of test track at WDW with a cars overlay?

If this has been approved, i don't think it will be anything like test track with a "Cars" overlay.

I remember A couple people mentioning that the "CARS" attraction involved not only the attraction but a whole new land with other pads for future development. It was also going to utilize the wasted spaces under the outside portions of the track to have buildings that could be used for eateries and stores.

The show building was suppose to be impressive and located behind Tower with a walkway connecting it to HPB and the Warf.

I could also see them using some of the backstage area for the elevated track sequences that will represent the race in the movei with the attraction vehicle picking up speed and then circling the showbuilding themed to a race track.

[ismael flores]

Originally Posted by Dodds

Then as I said above, I see the entrance plaza in greater need of attention. I can see how it would be logical to address this area now though, if a new ride and lagoon show is being developed as well as california screamin' is going down for a refurb (possibly to get new additions similar to rock it mountain as marcie hinted).

They are saving toute 66 for w hole new concept that would better utilize the area. One idea rumored is expanding San Francisco. Another one was redisgning it to better represent route 66. If "CARS" was greenlit i would think they would go with an Expanded San Francisco since "CARS" has a show building that would not fit in that area. "Cars" would be the perfect foundation for a new route 66 land.


As for California screamin I had heard some interesting ideas for it. Inclduing enclosing some more areas of the track and completely covering the ones that already have coverings. The ideas for the theme of these covered areas sounded quite interesting too. Lets just say they would not just be blue tubes and would add some of elements that would pay tribute to one of California's diverse cultures.

[Abe22222222]

Originally Posted by D4Wdreams

Take this as you will but someone over at Laughingplace posted today that Cars Test Track "has been officially greenlit for DCA".


Would this be the good news or the bad news?

Will you be kind enough to post a link to that page? Thank you very much

[ismael flores]

So if this was the news then that means Michael or Marcie can finish spilling the beans. Either that are descredit the news.

[D4Wdreams]

Originally Posted by Abe22222222

Will you be kind enough to post a link to that page? Thank you very much

http://mb.laughingplace.com/default....esh=0512150911

[Dodds]

Originally Posted by jonvn

Give me a break. I've known this joker and his pack of goons for years, and have had to deal with his outrageous and offensive behavior directed at myself, my friends, and people who he's tried to get fired from their jobs, the stalking, and the threats.

Don't lecture me about him, or what I know about him and of him. He's not a nice person, he doesn't do nice things, and he's probably the most venal character I've ever come across in 25 years of being online.

The rules on this board don't let me say what I would like to, so I'll just stop there. He has his little corner of the world, and I do my best to avoid it, except when some individual decides that what he has to say has some relevance to anything ever, which it certainly never does, and ends up posting it here.

Drop it.

I think you are misinterpreting my post jonvn. I was in no way trying to defend al lutz, I was simply replying in general to your statement that you do not need to meet a person to have fair insight on them.

If I came across as some kind of Al supporter then I can assure you that is the farthest from the truth. I don't hate the guy like you seem to, but that is probably because I don't have the experiences you are referring to.

When I said in general, that's what I meant. I was just saying I have seen far to many people start grouping together and acting negative towards individuals based on a lack of understanding towards them. I wasn't directly accusing you of having unjust views because you don't know him well enough, if that's is how it came across.

[jonvn]

I was simply replying in general to your statement that you do not need to meet a person to have fair insight on them.

And as was trying to say in my reply, you are quite wrong in this regard.

You don't have to meet, say, Osama bin Laden to know he's not the sort you want to have at your bar mitzvah. Sure, he might be fun at the dais telling laugh a minute stories of torture and murder, but I think most people would get the idea without really having met him that doing such a thing would not be the best of ideas.

P.S., I don't hate him. I simply don't like him. I would very likely pull him from a burning car if I had the cause. I might intentionally step on his hands afterwards, but I'd still pull him out.

[Dodds]

And you see I disagree with that statement. Using Osama bin Laden is a fairly extreme example, because I think in general people have a problem with anyone who has been involved in murder, so that's one action that does speak clearly enough for itself.

Using the more humane example I used early of Michael Eisner, though I strongly disagree with his management of the company, I don't think I have the right to hold the view of disliking him as a person. Sure I have seen him on TV and watched his management over the years and for that I feel I have every right to dislike him as disney's (former) CEO, but I don't want to confuse disliking his role in running the company with his personal self.

I don't know all the individual aspects that have influenced his decisions over the years nor what it would truly be like to talk with the man one on one. He has a wife and children and I haven't seen how he is around around them, just his corporate business self which has to be tuff and harsh at times.

It is possible to fairly judge a person without meeting them if you have a multitude of information on them, but in general it's pretty hard. Heck, there have been some people I have seen for basically everyday of my life and I have found out things about them that reinforce how much I really don't know them. People are complex and unless you know there inner workings, I don't think anyone can properly judge them, especially if have never meet them before.

PS: Whether or not your trying too, I don't know, but your posts are a hoot