The Cars just took on a life of their own, after a while. For the people who saw the Carpool thread when it first appeared, in the context of the board at that time, it was reasonably clear that the "meat" of Greg's poll was an attempt to remove some of the subjective aspect of the average post.
We were all here in the first place because of our attachments to Disney, but there were voices of complaint heard through the attachments, and you started to see posts like "because I like it, your dislike is trumped" and "if it's so bad, you don't have to go."
It became obvious that different people like different things, that you simply cannot define "Disney Magic" in terms of who likes what product. So conversation turned to critiquing the business processes and philosophy rather than the product, and "Magic" took on a local meaning "those philosophies and points of view useful to creating entertainment that will be considered Magical."
Basically, the Cars were intended to ideological place posters on the scale of 1. Today's business processes are able to produce products that people consider Magic with the same consistency as throughout Disney's past; 2. Today's business processes aren't producing products that people consider Magic with the same consistency as throughout Disney's past, but there is a personal belief that those processes will be changed soon to regain that consistency; 3. Today's business processes aren't producing products that people consider Magic with the same consistency as throughout Disney's past, and there is a personal belief that those processes are unlikely to soon change and regain that consistency; and 4. Today's business practices mirror non-Disney practices that never produced consistent Magic, and Six Flags is as likely to produce a product that people consider Magic as is Disney.
At the time, saying "well, I'm in Car #3, so..." was useful shorthand for "well, I think Eisner and Pressler focus on the financial aspects of creation to the detriment of the guest experience aspects and to the point that "cheap" carries as much corporate weight as "thematically detailled," so..."
They were handy. And, notably, at the time, each Car was most usefully referenced by its own passengers, as a means of explaining the prejudice under which the expressed positions were developed.
The Carpools outlasted the "board mood" that spawned them. Without certain conversations being front and center on the boards, the brief descriptions on each Car didn't carrry the same connotation they once did. Add the fact that quite a number of more recent posters figured out what Car they were in based on reading other posts mentioning the Cars (simply not seeing the poll, at first), and it's really not surprising that there seems to be a significant percentage of posters who believe the Cars measure "how much do you like Disney, 1, 2, or 3?"
No, none of those definitions ever actually appeared verbatim on the Board. No, this is not a lecture to point out how stupidly someone mis-read the Cars. No, this is not suggesting that anyone who didn't happen to be on the boards that long ago shouldn't participate.
My first point is simply this: there is a reasonable and logical explanation why the Cars now mean different things to different people.
A second point is this: if the Cars are to remain a useful classification device and not become a board slur, more of us are going to have to agree a bit more on what, precisely, each Car means.
And finally this: I personally feel that if we collectively decide the Cars will mean "How much do you like Disney, 1, 2, or 3," then Car #3 will completely evaporate, and Car #2 may not need be more spacious than a two-door Yugo. I don't think that Cars defined that way will be a useful short-hand for individuals to use when describing their opinions or backgrounds.
-WFH
