Got caught by the waitlist rule!

[Simba's Mom]

The one I didn't know about was that a waitlist can't be modified, you have to start at the bottom of the list with a new waitlist. I was waitlisted for a 1 BR at BCV for 4 nights (fortunately we already have a studio at BCV for those nights). So yesterday I decided that I'd drop the last night of the waitlist, and just keep the waitlist for the 3 nights DH is going to be there. Well, MS told me that if I wanted to make the change, she'd have to discontinue that waitlist and set up a new one for just the 3 nights, effectively restarting my waitlist. I didn't know that so she really caught me by surprise. I decided to go ahead anyways, kind of discouraged. Was I the only one who didn't know this?

[bubster]

I didn't know about this either. Thanks for letting us know but sorry you had to find out the hard way.

[RweTHEREyet]

I am wondering if this is a recent change? I never heard that you could not modify a waitlist unless you went to the bottom of this list. Sounds absurd to me.

I have made waitlist changes in the past and no one ever said anything about being put at the bottom of the list. Maybe they did it and I just didn't know the difference, but again, sounds absurd to me.

[Dragonkeeper]

I figured this out since you can't edit the wait lists.

[RweTHEREyet]

Originally Posted by Dragonkeeper

I figured this out since you can't edit the wait lists.

There are a lot of things we can't do at the on-line reservation system, but MS can, so just because we can't do them, doesn't mean it can't be done.

[Presley]

That is discouraging. You are asking for one less, not one more. Good grief. I hope it was just an idiot CM and that it isn't really like that.

[disneystitch626]

Yes, this is true. Sadly, we nearly found that out when we were on a wailsit for a second studio at VGC this past June. When I asked MS to 'modify' our waitlist about 2 mounts out from our trip in an effort to increase our chances in getting what we needed, MS told me that we would be starting all over again and that it made no sense to modify an exisiting WL. Effectively telling me that BEFORE then could ADD the 'modifed' WL, we would FIRST have to cancel our current WL. Yikes, no fun there.

[brp]

Originally Posted by Presley

That is discouraging. You are asking for one less, not one more. Good grief. I hope it was just an idiot CM and that it isn't really like that.

Let's make sure to refer to the employee as an idiot, even though they are following the program rules, whether one likes the rule or not. I break rules all the time. But I'd certainly not disparage an employee for following a rule, no matter what I thought about it.

Cheers.

[kdzgon]

Originally Posted by brp

Let's make sure to refer to the employee as an idiot, even though they are following the program rules, whether one likes the rule or not. I break rules all the time. But I'd certainly not disparage an employee for following a rule, no matter what I thought about it.

Cheers.

While I agree with not disparaging the CMs (or for that matter anyone, whenever possible - though in the end we are all mistake-making humans), I read this as a wish that the encounter was due to an "idiot CM" rather than an accurate situation. While perhaps not the nicest of phrasing, I didn't read it as name-calling of the existing employee. JMO, YMMV.

[DisneyKim]

Originally Posted by brp

Let's make sure to refer to the employee as an idiot, even though they are following the program rules, whether one likes the rule or not. I break rules all the time. But I'd certainly not disparage an employee for following a rule, no matter what I thought about it.

Cheers.

I'm pretty sure they weren't calling them an idiot for following the rules. They were hoping that the CM was an "idiot" (or perhaps just misinformed) and that this was not in fact the program rule.