URGENT-Disney Proposed Settlement

[Tarkus]

OK, Time is running short. If you have yet to fill out your objection to the Disney Class Action please do so now. We need all of you to make our case.

http://208.112.97.123/DisneyClassAct...0/Default.aspx

Be Big,
AMAC

[Bob.Kerns]

In my objection, I raised an issue of the platform automatically accommodating my balance, and how this would not be possible in their standing vehicle.

Well, today turns up a video that not only illustrates this problem, but shows what to my mind is a FATAL flaw in their entire idea.

Watch this video, of a non-tilting platform (it doesn't even use wheels, but that's irrelevant to my point). Note how often people FALL OFF. Note that they FALL OFF EVEN WHEN SEATED!'

http://www.slipperybrick.com/2009/03...h-insect-legs/

Why do they fall off? Because lean and acceleration are not coordinated, as they would be when walking -- or on a Segway.

The cure? Either be a Segway -- or limit how fast it can start or stop. And limiting how fast it can stop means -- collision dangers.

The Segway stops exactly as fast as the person is able to balance. Never more -- or less.

Should I amend my objection to better emphasize this point, and cite this evidence?

(I wonder if we can borrow their device for a trip to Disneyland?)

[JohnM]

Originally Posted by Bob.Kerns

In my objection, I raised an issue of the platform automatically accommodating my balance, and how this would not be possible in their standing vehicle.

Bob,
You seem to have some inside information on the performance characteristics of the Disney standing vehicle. Care to share?

Or are you just setting up a strawman that can easily be tipped over?

Should you amend you objection to better emphasize this point, and cite this evidence? What evidence do you have that relates directly to the Disney device? None. This is no better that the people who object to Segways even though they are totally ignorant about their capabilities. Till Disney unvails their standing vehicle. its all wild speculation.

I think this class action settlement stinks. But at the same time I think Disney has the resources to develop a device that would as safe as a Segway in their particular venue. Is it fair to force people to use it? No. The battle here is for people to have the right to choose the device that best suits their needs, not the relative safey of one device over another.

[KSagal]

Originally Posted by JohnM

Bob,
You seem to have some inside information on the performance characteristics of the Disney standing vehicle. Care to share?

Or are you just setting up a strawman that can easily be tipped over?

Should you amend you objection to better emphasize this point, and cite this evidence? What evidence do you have that relates directly to the Disney device? None. This is no better that the people who object to Segways even though they are totally ignorant about their capabilities. Till Disney unvails their standing vehicle. its all wild speculation.

I think this class action settlement stinks. But at the same time I think Disney has the resources to develop a device that would as safe as a Segway in their particular venue. Is it fair to force people to use it? No. The battle here is for people to have the right to chose the device that best suits their needs, not the relative safey of one device over another.

What evidence do you have that Disney has any resources or skills at designing a device of this sort? Or is that just a strawman you are offering up...

I am unaware of any transportation devices that Disney has developed, much less one that is as safe as a segway. If you have any evidence to support your statement, please inform us... Otherwise it is just your speculation.

[Gihgehls]

John is right. The fact that the segway is extremely safe in almost any circumstance only makes Disney's stance sting even more. The battle is about rights, not safety.

[JohnM]

Originally Posted by KSagal

I am unaware of any transportation devices that Disney has developed, much less one that is as safe as a segway. If you have any evidence to support your statement, please inform us... Otherwise it is just your speculation.

Ever been to a Disney park Karl? They have these things called 'rides'........Oh never mind.

[Bob.Kerns]

Originally Posted by JohnM

Bob,
You seem to have some inside information on the performance characteristics of the Disney standing vehicle. Care to share?

Or are you just setting up a strawman that can easily be tipped over?

Should you amend you objection to better emphasize this point, and cite this evidence? What evidence do you have that relates directly to the Disney device? None. This is no better that the people who object to Segways even though they are totally ignorant about their capabilities. Till Disney unvails their standing vehicle. its all wild speculation.

I think this class action settlement stinks. But at the same time I think Disney has the resources to develop a device that would as safe as a Segway in their particular venue. Is it fair to force people to use it? No. The battle here is for people to have the right to choose the device that best suits their needs, not the relative safey of one device over another.

John, I have an excellent command of physics, kinematics, and related disciplines. I am not speculating about physics.

The Segway is unique as a mobile platform for standing, because of certain details of how it interacts with the rider -- which depend on it either being an inverted pendulum -- or ACTING like it's an inverted pendulum. (There's more to analyzing a Segway than an inverted pendulum, but that's the critical part).

Now, instead of wheels, they could perhaps use articulated legs, or tracks, or some other number of wheels besides two, or something we haven't considered.

For it to interact properly with the rider's balance, it will, of physical necessity, ACT like a Segway.

I grant you -- they could come up with a device which ACTS like a Segway, but is not a Segway because of some implementation details. But if it ACTS like a Segway, it threatens to blow away their entire argument against Segways.

We do not know exactly what they are proposing, yet we must respond, nonetheless. As they have released no information, the best we can do, is to set the bar as high as possible. Basically, my point is that to be safe for me to ride, it will have to be so much like a Segway that it would not be in their interest to pursue it.

Unless they have plans to COMPETE with Segway, and think they have something better. But even then, it is to OUR advantage to set the legal bar as high as possible for quality and safety.

We do NOT need to know the details of their design to do that.

[KSagal]

JohnM,

You are being silly. The Monorail you pictured has nothing to do with their ability to design a device as a mobility aide that is safer than a segway, as you claimed...

Do you even know if they developed that monorail?

You attack people for having no evidence for what they say, and when I ask if you have any evidence at all, you offer a picture of a train that they may or may not have designed...

Now, I know you have stated many times that you don't ride segways, but in case you were not aware, they are not like elevated trains. They are somewhat different...

Where is your evidence to support your claim? I would love to see it.

[JohnM]

Originally Posted by KSagal

JohnM,

You are being silly. The Monorail you pictured has nothing to do with their ability to design a device as a mobility aide that is safer than a segway, as you claimed...

Do you even know if they developed that monorail?

You attack people for having no evidence for what they say, and when I ask if you have any evidence at all, you offer a picture of a train that they may or may not have designed...

Now, I know you have stated many times that you don't ride segways, but in case you were not aware, they are not like elevated trains. They are somewhat different...

Where is your evidence to support your claim? I would love to see it.

Oh, Karl, there you go again.

Go back and read what I said, not what you think I said.

"But at the same time I think Disney has the resources to develop a device that would as safe as a Segway in their particular venue."

Not develop. Resources to develop. They may or may not have devloped their monorail, but had the resources needed to have it developed. Big difference. Any outfit with the resources to develop a monorail, probably has the resources, i.e. $$$$, to develop a safe stand-up scooter.

Why they would want to go to the trouble remains a mystery.

[Bob.Kerns]

Ah, you're both being unnecessarily confrontational.

Disney has very good engineers, a lot of them, with a lot of creativity and imagination.

I know that very well. I know people who have worked in that specific area, though not recently. For that matter, my wife does a lot of physics simulations, including with humans -- and works for a Disney unit.

I can forgive John for assuming that I was assuming that Disney is not capable, or that I was assuming certain things about their device. I was not, but I can understand how my comments might read that way.

I do NOT assume that Disney cannot design a reasonable ECV. Possibly one that is safer than a Segway in limited ways. (It would have to be "limited ways" because a Segway isn't very dangerous at all).

Nor do I assume they CAN design one as safe as the Segway. There is a significant chance they will design something they THINK is safe, based on their experience with and testing on a non-impaired population. Or they could fall short for a number of other reasons. Or they may run afoul of patents and be forced to compromise safety.

It is HIGHLY unlikely they will do sufficient safety testing to give a valid statistical comparison, at least not during the lifetime of the case, no matter how it gets dragged out. For one thing, they don't let us use Segways in the parks, so there's one half the comparison shot right there. And the number of hours of Segway usage to collect enough accidents -- well, it would take a while, using experienced riders (which is what is at issue here).

And remember, we don't have to convince Disney. We don't even have to counter their ECV. We have to convince a judge of the merits of a Segway.

All this back-and-forth about what Disney can or cannot do is irrelevant, to the courtroom. It's what Disney does or does not HAVE to do, and what a Segway can or cannot do.