St. Louis Museum Offers Thrills, Chills, and Lawsuits

Scary indeed! by JDSalinger · 2010-05-03 06:54 · Score: 4, Informative

I have climbed through their jungle gym and I must say it is quite scary. You definitely feel right on the edge of safe. Yet it stands out like no other "museum" I've been to. As such, it is quite provocative and truly unique, but contains minimal content and only satiates perhaps an hour of curiosity.

Re:Scary indeed! by DIplomatic · 2010-05-03 07:05 · Score: 5, Interesting

I have climbed through their jungle gym and I must say it is quite scary. You definitely feel right on the edge of safe. Yet it stands out like no other "museum" I've been to. As such, it is quite provocative and truly unique, but contains minimal content and only satiates perhaps an hour of curiosity.
"...only satiates perhaps an hour of curiosity" Only an hour??? I went there with a group of friends as a senior in college and it was the most fun I've had in my adult life! We spent about 6 hours running, climbing, sliding, jumping, and generally laughing like children. It's one of the few places where there are no rules to be followed, and the whole point is to remember what it was like to climb on everything.
Re:Scary indeed! by Moryath · 2010-05-03 07:41 · Score: 2, Interesting

Anybody remember when "personal responsibility" meant something?
"Waah, I paid admission, then went down a slide and didn't pay attention to what I was doing and injured myself so I'm suing you for $$$."
Kill all the lawyers. First step towards reclaiming society. Second step: reclaim the jury system so it's no longer twelve retards who think the defendant has unlimited funds and "can afford" to just pay out in Lawsuit Lotto.
Re:Scary indeed! by Thelasko · 2010-05-03 07:47 · Score: 4, Insightful

You definitely feel right on the edge of safe. Yet it stands out like no other "museum" I've been to.
Feels right on the edge of being called a "museum" too. Sounds more like an amusement park.

I guess the question is, is it an awesome museum or crappy amusement park?

--
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
Re:Scary indeed! by _peter · 2010-05-03 07:49 · Score: 1

Seconded. I could spend more than an hour just on the multi-story spiral slide and in the grotto surrounding it.
Not to mention the stuff they host -- a children's circus, corner shoelace maker/store, papermaking and glassblowing exhibits. And at night, live music, or the outdoor firepits w/ marshmallows provided. One of the upper floors has been converted into condos. I still dream about living on top of that festival.
My only bad experience there was checking out their petting zoo / aquatic exhibit. Some of those animals seemed just this side of mis-treated.
Re:Scary indeed! by Grim+Beefer · 2010-05-03 07:56 · Score: 1

The aquarium is actually a separate business that co-occupies the space with the City Museum, as is the thrift store. That's why you have to pay a separate admission price to get into the aquarium, and you actually don't have to pay any admission if you say you're just going to the thrift store...
Re:Scary indeed! by m.ducharme · 2010-05-03 08:21 · Score: 1

Kill all the lawyers.
That's great advice; tyrants love it when you throw out the rule of law.

--
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
Re:Scary indeed! by Moryath · 2010-05-03 09:00 · Score: 4, Interesting

Lawyers ARE the tyrants these days. We basically live in a lawyerocracy; look how many corrupt lawyers there are in congress, the white house, etc... it's gotten to the point where the few honest lawyers will actually tell you that NOBODY KNOWS how many possible federal crimes there are - you can't go two steps without theoretically breaking the law somehow.
The phrase "they're always guilty of something"? The lawyers made it so.
Re:Scary indeed! by vrmlguy · 2010-05-03 10:04 · Score: 1

City Museum is one of the reasons I'd glad to live in St. Louis. Growing up in the Midwest, visits to "fun" places like New Jersey's Action Park weren't possible. We had to settle for quarry jumping and lawn darts.

--
Nothing for 6-digit uids?
Re:Scary indeed! by Sebastien_Bailard · 2010-05-03 10:55 · Score: 1

"This anti-lawyer screed brought to you by British Petroleum."
Re:Scary indeed! by skam240 · 2010-05-03 11:13 · Score: 1

Name calling is awesome! It's like being in Junior High again!
We know you're not a real righty because you know how to spell words! Plus, you're a faggot!
This is great!

--
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
Re:Scary indeed! by Moryath · 2010-05-03 13:28 · Score: 2, Interesting

By who now?
Count up the number of bad lawsuits you've seen. Count up the number of times you've been in a jury selection pool, only some dickweed shyster had you removed with a peremptory challenge because you are "too smart" and they can't bamboozle you.
The day we first had jury selection consultants is the day the justice system DIED. It just doesn't know it yet.
Re:Scary indeed! by skam240 · 2010-05-03 17:34 · Score: 1

I think you could use a few basic Poly Sci 100 classes under your belt. The current administration's complete failure at implementing socialized medicine does not equate in any way, shape, or form to Communism. Calling it as such would not only imply that the rest of the industrialized world was communist (which would be retarded) but would also suggest the other logical extreme that anyone in favor of small government was an anarchist.

--
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
Re:Scary indeed! by TheVelvetFlamebait · 2010-05-03 19:30 · Score: 1

Lawyers ARE the tyrants these days. We basically live in a lawyerocracy; look how many corrupt lawyers there are in congress, the white house, etc...

Jews ARE the tyrants these days. We basically live in a jewocracy; look how many corrupt jews there are in congress, the white house, etc...

Commies ARE the tyrants these days. We basically live in a commiocracy; look how many corrupt communist pinkos there are in congress, the white house, etc...

Crab People ARE the tyrants these days. We basically live in a crabocracy; look how many corrupt Crab People there are in congress, the white house, etc...
Spot the difference between the seemingly identical statements!
A lawyer's job is very similar to a politician's job. They both basically debate for a living. The transition of lawyer to politician is extremely natural. It, in no way, follows that because there are a lot of ex-lawyers in politics, that lawyers have formed some kind of conspiracy to rule the world. Or maybe that's their mind-control ray telling me to say that.

it's gotten to the point where the few honest lawyers will actually tell you that NOBODY KNOWS how many possible federal crimes there are - you can't go two steps without theoretically breaking the law somehow.
The phrase "they're always guilty of something"? The lawyers made it so.
Again, it doesn't quite follow, and again you are failing to differentiate between lawyers and politicians. Just because we have a complex legal system, doesn't imply a conspiracy of lawyers! Nor does it mean that we have a conspiracy of politicians. What it does mean is that determining what is right and wrong is a complex issue. If you're too broad, then you end up punishing essentially innocent people doing nothing intuitively wrong. If you make it too lax, then you get people ruthlessly exploiting loopholes, of which you can do nothing about. It is, in fact, in our interests to make the law complex, for humanity is complex.
Oh, and for the record, I have never met a person, lawyer or not, who claims that the number of federal crimes is known by anyone. The only dishonesty I can see is your intellectual dishonesty, insinuating that some lawyers basically lie for the sake of it.

--
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Re:Scary indeed! by ShakaUVM · 2010-05-04 02:51 · Score: 1

Obama and Biden are both lawyers.
AFAIK, they're not Jewish Commie Crab people, but they're definitely lawyers.
The Democrat party protects a lot of the really degenerate behavior you see from our modern legal system, because... they're a party of lawyers. Simple enough explanation, isn't it? No conspiracy theory needed.
And yeah, there are some simple reforms that we probably should implement, that we won't get until we build up the political will to do so. Most people just don't care.
Re:Scary indeed! by TheVelvetFlamebait · 2010-05-04 03:25 · Score: 1

Obama and Biden are both lawyers.
AFAIK, they're not Jewish Commie Crab people, but they're definitely lawyers.
OK, fair enough. But, I'm sure that at least one of their party is Jewish, but I don't see any accusations (except racist trolls, but they conflated Jews with rich people anyway) that they pass any Jew-favouring laws. You see, it doesn't follow that just because the party has x percentage of y minority, that y minority runs the party. That's because they're professional politicians, capable, on the whole, of putting their personal preferences aside in order to ensure their re-election.

The Democrat party protects a lot of the really degenerate behavior you see from our modern legal system, because... they're a party of lawyers. Simple enough explanation, isn't it? No conspiracy theory needed.
So they do it out of the kindness hearts? There's no collusion between them and lawyers to scratch each others backs? They are willing to alienate voters in order to pay unsolicited and unreciprocated favours to their ex-profession?
I assumed conspiracy theory, because the theory without the conspiracy makes no sense, despite its consummate simplicity.

--
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Re:Scary indeed! by zmaragdus · 2010-05-04 03:25 · Score: 1

I don't think it is either an "awesome museum" or "crappy amusement park." I would call it an awesome fun-house/jungle-gym with some museum qualities about it. If you would stop running & climbing like crazy for a second and look around, a lot of older industrial themes are present. Add two jet fighters and other add-ons and it definitely has a bit of a museum air about it. It is definitely not the type of museum that you would visit to learn a lot about a given topic (maybe in this case the limitations of your body). However, compared to other amusement parks, the value of admission is well worth it (personal experience). Just bring sturdy clothes and schedule a massage for the next day.

--
(((dB)))
Re:Scary indeed! by Can't+hark+my+cry · 2010-05-04 05:32 · Score: 1

My brother and his family live in St. Louis. I live on the East Coast. The first place I want to go when I visit them is the City Museum. My nephew was 3 the first time I visited and his dad and I took him to the City Museum. When I returned a year later, the first thing he said to me was "Can we go to the Science Museum?" After some discussion, it was established that he meant the City Museum. . .which had evidently made quite an impression on him the first time we went. Me too! It is an incredibly content-rich environment. Agreed, much of the content is not explained (although they have added more traditional museum-type displays, including a stunning collection of items dug out of old privies); but everywhere you look, there is something fascinating to think about, because it is constructed out of industrial and architectural leftovers. There's a wall made out of what appear to be breadloaf tins from some giant industrial bakery. There are walls covered in circuit boards. The slides are old commercial freight chutes. On, and on, and on. . .even the rest room is built out of reused and reimagined materials (well, the toilet is standard modern Crane. . .) And there is a truly terrific aquarium housed in the same building, although it is run by a different organization. And a carnival side-show area, and an old shoelace factory. . .You must have gone in the early days, because--without meaning to be unnecessarily offensive--only the incurious could find their curiosity satiated in an hour at the City Museum. In my second visit we went to the City Museum twice--over two hours for each visit--and yes, we went to the Science Museum once. Lots of interactive exhibits--which only one child at a time could use, so they got monopolized, and were mostly being used in a manner not contemplated by the designers. Bored me nearly to tears, and my nephew was impossible to deal with the whole time. I'll take the City Museum any day! In fact, if I weren't kind of stuck to my current job, I'd seriously consider relocating to St. Louis and moving into one of the lofts that the owners have installed in the City Museum building.
Re:Scary indeed! by Engdy · 2010-05-04 07:29 · Score: 1

(Haven't scanned the whole comment tree, so this may be redundant) There are museums within the facility, and even the weirdest aquarium you'll ever find, so it's definitely a blend of both. There's collections of door locks and hinges, columns and arches, blown glass, and more eclectic stuff that I can't remember at the moment.

--
Siggy Wiggy Figgy Tiggy a bana bo Biggy!
Re:Scary indeed! by ShakaUVM · 2010-05-04 13:33 · Score: 1

So they do it out of the kindness hearts? There's no collusion between them and lawyers to scratch each others backs? They are willing to alienate voters in order to pay unsolicited and unreciprocated favours to their ex-profession?
The issue is exactly that. Voters don't care, so they get away with whatever they want.
It's certainly not limited to just lawyers, of course. Generally speaking, the principle is called the Iron Triangle, if you want to read about how it works.
Re:Scary indeed! by TheVelvetFlamebait · 2010-05-04 20:12 · Score: 1

The issue is exactly that. Voters don't care, so they get away with whatever they want.
So I take that neither you nor the OP are voters?

--
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Re:Scary indeed! by ShakaUVM · 2010-05-04 22:20 · Score: 1

Let's say that voters - as a group - don't care. In fact, the people that care about it are probably outnumbered by the number of lawyers in America.
Re:Scary indeed! by TheVelvetFlamebait · 2010-05-05 00:10 · Score: 1

OK, let's examine just how absurd your position really is. If it weren't for the sheer number of fellow citizens who are so eager to think like you (which would be evidence enough that you're wrong), your opinion would be laughable.
This apathetic American... largely a myth designed to explain why people don't care about $PERSONAL_BUGBEAR. The truth is that everyone is apathetic to a great number of issues, but the reason is not necessarily because they're lazy, but because they genuinely don't think it's a problem. Some are more apathetic to the government than others, but that's because the government is actually providing what they expect from society: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happyness. "Apathetic" people are the sign that people are happy with what you're doing, i.e. you're doing something right.
Now, back to the lawyers, my point was that the OP's comment makes no sense, unless you assume some kind of collusion between politicians and lawyers. Voters being apathetic or not is actually not an integral part of my argument. If Obadman is favouring lawyers, there needs to be some kind of incentive to do so. When you have as busy a schedule as many politicians do, you don't just pass possibly alienating bills for shits and giggles.

--
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Re:Scary indeed! by ShakaUVM · 2010-05-05 03:47 · Score: 1

>>When you have as busy a schedule as many politicians do, you don't just pass possibly alienating bills for shits and giggles.
I don't believe you have any clear concept of how politics actually works.
Re:Scary indeed! by TheVelvetFlamebait · 2010-05-05 03:53 · Score: 1

Perhaps you're right. Perhaps they just screw with the public for the fun of it. Maybe the moon landing was a conspiracy, and maybe the crab people have taken over Washington.
Whatever. This discussion was never particularly interesting.

--
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Re:Scary indeed! by ShakaUVM · 2010-05-05 06:19 · Score: 1

>>Perhaps they just screw with the public for the fun of it.
You're the lunatic who thinks that politicians who are lawyers will go out of their way to pass laws to piss off lawyers, alienating a huge money-contributing part of their base, in order to impress the small fraction of Americans that think there's serious problems with how liability works in America these days.
In other words, they don't *need* to do anything - the system is already incredibly favored toward lawyers.
But yeah, chalk it up to the "busy schedules" of the "crab people congressmen" or whatever crazy conception you have for how congress works.
Re:Scary indeed! by Alcoholist · 2010-05-05 07:35 · Score: 1

Perhaps the GP is just frustrated by a society that seems to be increasingly dominated by officiousness, bureaucracy and legal dogmatism. It's lawyers who tend to make that happen and people are starting to become afraid of them.
RIAA lawsuits, anyone? America has got the the point where a lawyer with an axe to grind can bankrupt a defendant without actually winning the case.
I think people are starting to question professionals in general, because after the last few years, it seems as if all they want to do is get richer and use everyday people to do it.
You can understand why some folks have a bit of resentment.

--
Bibo Ergo Sum.
Re:Scary indeed! by TheVelvetFlamebait · 2010-05-06 06:19 · Score: 1

You're the lunatic who thinks that politicians who are lawyers will go out of their way to pass laws to piss off lawyers
That's not what I said. That's certainly not what I meant. It's one thing to not favour lawyers. It's a completely different thing to go out of your way to piss them off. Both are completely different again to what the OP said (which is what I was responding to) that politicians favour lawyers. The implied conspiracy in that is better, for the OP, left inexplicitly stated, because, like most conspiracy theories, it doesn't hold up to most scrutiny.
But, as you say, they don't need to do anything. You say it's because it favours the lawyers, they say it's because they want the legal system to be flexible enough to allow justice to actually be facilitated. I don't see nearly enough evidence to rule out their version, nor do I see enough to support yours. As far as I can tell, the legal system is a mess of good intentions, misguided attempts, necessary evils, and not particularly much corruption/malice built into the design (there is, presumably, corruption in some of the people who run it).
So, yes, you say there's nothing they need to do in order to favour lawyers. This was not what the OP was saying. He was saying that lawyers run the country, that they are tyrants, strongly implying that they were conspiring to make everyone guilty so they could rule them. The OP was talking about some active favouring of lawyers.
That was the OP. Now you decided to point out that Obama and Biden were lawyers. Interesting. Is that fact particularly relevant to this stance of yours? If Obadman is supporting lawyers passively, if you're not claiming that they're doing what they're doing for lawyers, then why bring it up? I think the answer is (although I have no proof) that you actually do believe that Obadman is supporting the lawyers, actively.
See, it's a problem for me here, as it always is arguing with you paranoid types, is that you rarely ever actually come out with an accusation. And if you do, it's nothing solid or verifiable. That puts me at an incredible disadvantage, especially when so many people here on /. feel the same way, even though their "knowledge" is based primarily on other people's paranoia and chinese whispers. Suddenly, all these half-baked vague accusations become /. fact, because everybody agrees.

But yeah, chalk it up to the "busy schedules" of the "crab people congressmen" or whatever crazy conception you have for how congress works.
Hahahahahaha! Hahahahahahahaha! Whoosh!

--
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Re:Scary indeed! by ShakaUVM · 2010-05-06 10:50 · Score: 1

Fair enough.
A good example of what I mean is when Health Care Reform was recently debated.
A lot of ideas were put on the table. Ideas that went contrary to the interests of lawyers (i.e. tort reform, malpractice reform, liability limitations, etc.) were *removed* from the table. So we got a kitchen sink health care bill that left the status quo in place, thus benefiting lawyers.
If the Democrats were not lawyers, and supported by lawyers, they probably wouldn't have acted to protect them in such a manner.
Re:Scary indeed! by oldspewey · 2010-05-07 03:35 · Score: 1

I went there with a group of friends as a senior in college and it was the most fun I've had in my adult life! We spent about 6 hours running, climbing, sliding, jumping, and generally laughing like children.
Yes, but you were stoned out of your tree while OP was not. It makes a huge difference.

--
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?

Slashdotted? by CannonballHead · 2010-05-03 06:56 · Score: 2, Funny

It appears to be slashdotted. Service Unavailable. I guess the web administrator is in the jungle gym...

Kids? by siwelwerd · 2010-05-03 07:02 · Score: 3, Informative

It boasts a five-story jungle gym with two real-life jets kids can climb on, an enclosed Monster Slide that drops riders the length of three staircases, and a rooftop Ferris wheel.

Kids? Every time I've been there there has been a significant percentage of 20-somethings in addition to the little ones.

Re:Kids? by gman003 · 2010-05-03 07:04 · Score: 4, Insightful

They're kids on the inside
Re:Kids? by WhiteDragon · 2010-05-03 07:10 · Score: 2, Informative

Kids? Every time I've been there there has been a significant percentage of 20-somethings in addition to the little ones.
The museum requires that all children are accompanied by an adult, and groups of kids must have adults in at least a 1:6 adult to child ratio. Also, it sounds like it would be fun for adults as well :-D

--
Did you mount a military-grade, variable-focus MASER on an unlicensed artificial intelligence?
Re:Kids? by v1 · 2010-05-03 07:16 · Score: 1

must have adults in at least a 1:6 adult to child ratio
That sounds like an excellent compromise for allowing the kids to have reasonably safe large dose of fun.
I'll admit having 30 kids from your class running around on a playground with only one teacher supervising is probably getting a little unmanageable. 6:1 is probably a bit cagey though but isn't outrageous.

--
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Re:Kids? by dyingtolive · 2010-05-03 07:22 · Score: 1

It is. They offer alcohol sales on most all of the floors and they're open quite late. It's a fun night to get drunk and stumble around the caves.

--
Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
Re:Kids? by jfoobar · 2010-05-03 07:31 · Score: 1

Try 30-somethings. I was 37 when I went and had quite a lot of fun climbing on stuff. Rebar is a bit tough on the knees though.
Re:Kids? by Firethorn · 2010-05-03 07:32 · Score: 1

Probably depends a bit on the 20-somethings that show up without kids to 'play' themselves to provide a bit of on the spot supervision.

--
I don't read AC A human right
Re:Kids? by BarryJacobsen · 2010-05-03 07:32 · Score: 2, Funny

They're kids on the inside
Possibly drunk on the inside, as well. :P

--
Track your TV Shows with your iPhone - FREE
Re:Kids? by siwelwerd · 2010-05-03 08:51 · Score: 1

Also, it sounds like it would be fun for adults as well :-D
Oh it definitely is, the phrase just made it sound like it was exclusively for kids-which it really isn't :)
Re:Kids? by rattaroaz · 2010-05-03 09:27 · Score: 1

They're kids on the inside
That's not right. I don't mean to preach, but if they're pregnant, they should not be climbing such obstacles.
Re:Kids? by 222 · 2010-05-03 09:40 · Score: 1

Kids on the inside, but very, very happy to have that grown up ID when visiting the bar for another round of beers!

This is seriously one of my favorite places ever = )
Re:Kids? by interkin3tic · 2010-05-03 09:59 · Score: 1

Possibly drunk on the inside, as well. :P
It's in St. Louis, that goes without saying.
Re:Kids? by zmaragdus · 2010-05-04 03:28 · Score: 1

You'll certainly appreciate the sedative effects of the alcohol after you've spent more than a few hours there.

--
(((dB)))

AWESOME by v1 · 2010-05-03 07:14 · Score: 4, Insightful

SOOO tired of "oh noes Little Timmy is gonna bump his knee on that, need more padding!" parents.

Quit taking the fun out of being a kid. Having fun as a kid is inherently a little risky. All these nuts trying to apply "five 9's" to public safety on playgrounds need to go live in a bubble somewhere and stay out of everyone else's lives.

The day they try to take trees out of the park because a kid may climb them and fall and get hurt, I'm gonna flip out.

--
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.

Re:AWESOME by diskofish · 2010-05-03 07:22 · Score: 1

I couldn't agree more. I would have loved this as a kid. Hell it would probably be fun now. I don't see why people get so worried, it's probably a lot safer than playing most sports, or other types of play that kids typically engage in: dodge ball, riding bikes, rollerblading, skateboarding, ice skating, base ball, etc etc.
Re:AWESOME by multipartmixed · 2010-05-03 08:05 · Score: 2, Insightful

> The day they try to take trees out of the park because a kid may climb them and fall and get hurt, I'm gonna flip out.
Have you noticed that playground equipment is virtually nowhere to be found anymore?

--

Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
Re:AWESOME by thepike · 2010-05-03 08:24 · Score: 1

Around me, there's still a lot of playground equipment, but not the fun stuff I played on when I was a kid. We used to have these awesome giant wooden play castle things with ropes to climb and bridges and monkey bars and all that. They've all been replaced with the colorful plastic/metal things that aren't nearly as fun and don't allow the same kind of adventure or number of ways to play. Also gone: merry-go-rounds, see-saws, cargo nets etc and anything more than about 10 feet tall. And all the woodchips have been replaced by an unidentified foam-rubber sort of material covering the ground. It's terrible.
Sure, some of my friends broke their arms falling off the monkey bars, and I lost a tooth once (luckily one of my last baby teeth) but we loved them. People should let their kids go outside and get dirty/get hurt. It'll make them healthier and happier in the long run.
But instead one person sued and won a ridiculous sum of money, then other followed suit and now it's not worth the insurance premiums to let kids have a little fun.
Re:AWESOME by snowraver1 · 2010-05-03 08:41 · Score: 3, Interesting

Marry-go-rounds were awesome. I remember this one thing that was a pole that was about 20 feet tall and it had a metal ring about 6' in diameter at the top. Attached to the ring were lengths of chain with a tire at the end. The whole thing would spin. You would get 3 kids on 3 of the tires and them spin it as fast as you could. Then the person doing the spinning would get on the tire, and the inertia from the 3 other people would send you FLYING. My brother ALMOST got flung off of it into a nearby trampoline.

We also used to have large swings where the top bar would be ~25-30 feet off the ground so you could swing really high. Now you are lucky to find a swing that is taller than 12'.

--
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
Re:AWESOME by cgenman · 2010-05-03 08:49 · Score: 5, Insightful

I remember people falling out of jungle gyms and breaking their arms as a kid. It's not great, but it happens. There was a woman at my college who fell backwards walking around the campus, hit her head just wrong on the cement, and died. I broken an arm riding a bike, and nearly shattered my hip rollerblading. My sister broke a finger running through the house. A friend destroyed most of the cartilidge in his back playing football. By comparison, hopping a fence, sticking your fingers into a giant rotating drum, and having them severed is just dumb.
Really, the question isn't "are there injuries?" Put a drinking fountain in a park, and given enough time and people someone is going to trip and break their teeth on it. The question is "how frequently are the injuries?" Are the injuries more frequent than other activities in life? They've had 3.5 million in attendance since 2005, and 24 known incidents that spawned a lawsuit. That's 150k people through for every known injury. Or, looked at another way, assuming each trip is 8 hours long, that's 1 injury for every 50,000 days of living. That's 1 lawsuit-worthy injury per 136 years of life.
I'd want to investigate this park specifically to see what steps they are and aren't taking to keep the play areas safe. But the numbers above just don't look bad to me.

--
The ______ Agenda
Re:AWESOME by snowraver1 · 2010-05-03 09:17 · Score: 1

I almost forgot about barf buckets! The one that was near my house was had a solid frame so it was a little more comfortable, but would collect puke!

--
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
Re:AWESOME by safetyinnumbers · 2010-05-03 09:37 · Score: 1

Also gone: merry-go-rounds, see-saws, cargo nets etc and anything more than about 10 feet tall. And all the woodchips have been replaced by an unidentified foam-rubber sort of material covering the ground. It's terrible.
In Andrew Brown Park, in Coppell, TX there is "Kid Kountry" which is wooden equipment with woodchips on the ground. A great playground, with a tire suspended from a chain, climbing nets, etc.
But even that doesn't have a merry-go-round. Coincidentally, my wife commented on their absence from all the playgrounds we've seen, a few days ago. When did they disappear?
Re:AWESOME by xaxa · 2010-05-03 09:48 · Score: 1

I work in a museum of sorts, with most of it being outside. Lots of school groups visit, and I'm always disappointed when I see a group of children wearing mini high-visibility jackets. I'm even more disappointed when I see some wearing helmets for walking round (essentially) a park.
Re:AWESOME by xaxa · 2010-05-03 09:56 · Score: 1

I can't remember where I read it -- some website about freedom for children to play etc -- but pretty much every playground in the UK has that rubber stuff installed after one child died in the 1980s. It's really expensive, and the author had estimated that it hadn't saved any lives, but if the money had been spent elsewhere (road safety, police, various options) it would have been a lot more useful.
There's still a decent amount of playground equipment around here, and it seems the same as when I was a child, but that was only the 1990s anyway.
Sometimes people go a bit too far though...
Re:AWESOME by v1 · 2010-05-03 10:39 · Score: 1

I see some wearing helmets for walking round
You're talking normal kids, not "specials" ? that's just crazy
I say "don't childproof the world, worldproof the child", but that's not the point I was trying to deliver...

--
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Re:AWESOME by nameer · 2010-05-03 11:42 · Score: 1

You can compare it to say, childbirth in the US, which has a Maternal Death rate of 11 per 100,000 births. It's a safe museum.

--
"Uh... yeah, Brain, but where are we going to find rubber pants our size?" --Pinky
Re:AWESOME by Sporkinum · 2010-05-03 14:43 · Score: 1

I think there are still enough daredevil kids. Youtube is filled with video of kids doing stupid things. However, It's a wonder I am still alive with the crap I did as a kid. Poring gasoline in the alley and lighting it on fire so we could ride out stingray bikes through a wall of flames. Having bb gun wars in the woods and using fire crackers as hand grenades. Taking the catwalk out to the middle of the bridge crossing the river and then riding it when the bridge opened up for a barge. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/ce/Ftmadisontollbr.jpg
etc. etc...

--
"He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
Re:AWESOME by sjames · 2010-05-03 18:33 · Score: 1

When I was growing up, we had nice soft dirt and grass to land on. It couldn't have been too bad since we would occasionally hop off of a swing on purpose.
It was fairly easy to get banged up, but serious injuries just weren't that common.
I suspect that's where we learned valuable life lessons that not every little thing calls for an emergency room and that really we are not terribly fragile.
I see people younger than me panicing at the first sight of blood. When I get injured from time to time they can't believe that I don't consider a doctor visit necessary when there's a perfectly good first aid kit available. It's really kinda sad.
Re:AWESOME by ShakaUVM · 2010-05-04 02:43 · Score: 1

>>That's 1 lawsuit-worthy injury per 136 years of life.
I'd argue that probably none of them were "lawsuit worthy".
If you know what I mean.
One of the side effects of having so many lawyers is that when a litigator needs to sue someone in order to eat, well, there's going to be a lot of stupid fucking lawsuits in our society.

To: the guy who only spent an hour in the museum. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-05-03 07:17 · Score: 4, Interesting

I've been there twice each time for 3-4 hours. I recommended it to some friends. They spent 45 minutes. The reason why. Because they are boring. They did absolutely no exploring. So didn't even find over half of the place. You have to EXPLORE. You want to know what they do at barbecues and parties. Sit and played x-box with a blank look on their face and grunted occasionally when they noticed you were talking to them. This is in no way aimed at the guy who said he was only there for an hour. Actually wait. Yes it is.

Two dozen out of how many? by iamhassi · 2010-05-03 07:19 · Score: 4, Insightful

Two dozen injuries out of 3.5 million people since 2005. That means over 99.999% are fine. I'll take those odds. Besides I've been there, nothings wrong, isn't anymore dangerous than any children's playground.

--
my karma will be here long after I'm gone

Re:Two dozen out of how many? by MozeeToby · 2010-05-03 07:31 · Score: 1

Two dozen lawsuits is not the same as two dozen injuries. If you figure 99% of injuries aren't going to be severe enough to warrant a lawsuit and some x% of people are going to respect what the museum is doing and not file a lawsuit even when they could the numbers don't look as good. Not that I disagree with you, need to stop taking the fun out of childhood, else we'll have a whole generation who never really grow up into proper adults.
Re:Two dozen out of how many? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-05-03 07:42 · Score: 2, Informative

else we'll have a whole generation who never really grow up into proper adults
Too late.
Re:Two dozen out of how many? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-05-03 08:38 · Score: 1, Informative

...else we'll have a whole generation who never really grow up into proper adults.
That's already happened. Thanks helicopter parents!
Re:Two dozen out of how many? by tniermann · 2010-05-03 09:24 · Score: 2, Insightful

I've been there numerous times with my kids. It seems safer than most places because it appears much more dangerous than it actuality and the kid's natural fear instinct works just fine. It is a much better than the inverse of actually dangerous but appearing safe (driving in the car to get there)

This is how it really should be by cwills · 2010-05-03 07:20 · Score: 5, Insightful

More power to the Museum and it's director.

I just wish that the US population would get over the general reaction to anything is to sue someone.

If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid. Q - "Q Who" Star Trek the Next Generation

One of my favorite quotes.

Re:This is how it really should be by Nautical+Insanity · 2010-05-03 08:03 · Score: 3, Insightful

If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed.
I would, but according to this that might not be a good idea since 300 people strangle themselves in bed every year in the US.
Re:This is how it really should be by Hurricane78 · 2010-05-03 08:16 · Score: 1

As a Slashdotter this might not be an obvious though, but have you considered them having been in bed with someone else? ^^

--
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Re:This is how it really should be by bartwol · 2010-05-03 10:21 · Score: 1

the judges are the ones that let the lawsuits happen in the first place. Try these in Europe, and most would never make it into the system
I would hope that the reason for that being the case in Europe, as in the U.S., is not that judges decided what lawsuits should be allowed, but that laws delineate the terms under which judges allow lawsuits. Citing judges for being responsible for lawsuits is like citing referees for responsible for people playing sports.

Danger by TheTick21 · 2010-05-03 07:36 · Score: 5, Insightful

I have spent way too much time in this wonderland and I must say that with proper adult supervision the danger is minimal compared to the kinds of stuff we did as kids. We used to leave in the morning and come back when the streetlights came on, build treehouses with exposed nails and rotting wood, jump down from said treehouses with nothing but a pile of leaves to catch us.

This place has its share of dangers, but wow. Worth it and then some. If ever there was a place that took all my favorite childhood memories and tried to stuff them into one building it would be this one.

"We have a huge liability policy." by ryrw · 2010-05-03 07:37 · Score: 2, Interesting

I met Bob Cassily a few years in St. Louis (where I've lived for 5 years) and I asked him how they deal with lawsuits. He answered: "We have a huge liability policy." Having been there at least half a dozen times, I have to agree that it can be dangerous—if you're stupid. Yes, you can climb over the railing and onto the airplane wing where you might fall 5 stories onto the parking lot. But if you're dumb enough to climb over the railing, then maybe you're doing us all a favor by removing your genes from society. If you've ever seen this place in real life, you'll have to agree that it's just so incredible that it should be kept just as it is. It is absolutely astonishing!

Re:"We have a huge liability policy." by Anonymous Coward · 2010-05-03 12:25 · Score: 1, Insightful

So how about the woman in the article who slid down the slide too fast, and broke bones after crashing into a wall across from the slide? What did she do wrong?
When I was a kid, we used to stick out our feet and use our sneakers to slow down on a slide. That's also how you could stop half-way and have your friends pile into you trying to dislodge you. Was this slide that the woman was on six or seven feet wide so that she couldn't do the same thing to slow down?
Re:"We have a huge liability policy." by kalirion · 2010-05-03 17:33 · Score: 1

"Troll" mod? Seriously?
Re:"We have a huge liability policy." by sjames · 2010-05-03 18:51 · Score: 1

I can only guess since I wasn't there, but she probably tried to lock her legs strait rather than hitting and rolling like she should have. Perhaps it was her first experiance with anything that required any sort of instinctive protective action and so she had no such instinct. We're supposed to learn those things as kids when we weigh less and have flexible bones so we don't do things like that as adults.
Re:"We have a huge liability policy." by BobMcD · 2010-05-04 02:23 · Score: 1

Having ridden all of the slides there as an adult, I can say they're all manageable. Perhaps she had on windbreaker pants or something, but still she could certainly have slowed her descent even with her hands against the slide. You pick up speed gradually on that surface, and once the fear response kicks in you do get the opportunity to react.
And common sense dictates that this must be the case. Otherwise, there would be more examples of injury, wouldn't there?

LINK: by deathplaybanjo · 2010-05-03 07:38 · Score: 1

It appears to be slashdotted. Service Unavailable. I guess the web administrator is in the jungle gym...

after a quick googling: http://www.citymuseum.org/3D.html (have fun with quicktime)

Re:Playgrounds by johnlcallaway · 2010-05-03 07:40 · Score: 1

The playground merry-go-rounds are all gone. No longer can you sit on the edge as your sadistic friend spins it around faster and faster, trapped unless you dare to take a leap unto the asphalt or gravel.

And no longer can you spin it around round faster and faster as your masochistic friends all sit, trapped and unable to flee unless they take a daring leap unto the asphalt or gravel.

Merry go rounds -- bringing sadists and masochists together for generations.

--
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.

Just use common sense by Grim+Beefer · 2010-05-03 07:40 · Score: 5, Interesting

I've been to the City Museum several times, and I must say there is really no other place like it on earth. If anyone finds the museum lacking in content, I'd have to say that you're missing the point. The CM is all about interaction; you're not meant to just see everything in the plain sense, you're meant to climb, explore, and seek out the little hidden places tucked away all over the place. Almost everything about the place is entirely free-form, and that's part of the thrill. If you find that the place only satisfies curiosity for about an hour, well then I bet you're probably a pretty boring person that's way too grown up for their own good.

Meanwhile, it's so refreshing to see a place disregard all of the idiot tags we're so used to seeing everyday. Given that 99.999% of the population doesn't need to be told not to do stupid things, it's really that tiny fraction of people that makes everything always suck. The ones that make you wonder who the fuck would be stupid enough to eat the silicate pellet packs you find in new shoes, but also have the ability to read. The only place remotely similar to the CM where I live is so padded, safe, and banal by comparison. Yes, there is the risk of getting hurt in the CM, but the same thing is often true of places kids play. Even a simple jungle gym can result in a broken bone (as it did with me in the 3rd grade), but the point is to not generate boring people by sacrificing a fun life for complete and utter safety. Learning how to deal with potentially dangerous environments, yet still enjoy yourself, should be a crucial part of any kids upbringing. You have to use common sense to NOT INTENTIONALLY PUT YOUR FINGERS OR BODY IN A GIGANTIC MOVING METAL DEVICE. You shouldn't need a sign explaining why this is a bad idea. Nowhere in the CM will you find spots where good old fashioned common sense will keep you from getting hurt, and at the very least are no more risky that other theme parks/playgrounds.

Re:Just use common sense by BenGL · 2010-05-03 09:53 · Score: 1

You have to use common sense to NOT INTENTIONALLY PUT YOUR FINGERS OR BODY IN A GIGANTIC MOVING METAL DEVICE.
Funny personal story about this: a few years ago, I decided to test the safety features of an automatic sliding door by sticking my fingers where I shouldn't have. Luckily I did not lose any finger, but I got some ugly scars to tell the tale.
I clearly remember my reasoning: it seemed dangerous, but it was in a public place. So of course, there was a safety interlock or something, because of our litigation-happy society. I just couldn't see it. As it turned out, there wasn't any. Ouch.
I didn't sue, though...
I submit this as anecdotal evidence that the current trend towards idiot-proofing can KILL common sense.

One of the best places anywhere... by Gybrwe666 · 2010-05-03 07:41 · Score: 3, Interesting

I'm the parent of 3 youngsters, and we go there all the time. Without a doubt it is one of the most engaging and fun places to take a kid in St. Louis. My kids play to exhaustion every time they go. As a matter of fact, so do I. We always comment (or hear people around us commenting) on how amazing it is that, considering the risk, they have the sort of place where nothing is off limits, and if you can get to it, you can go and climb on it and play on it. Is there danger? Yes, but you can drown in a bucket of water if you try hard enough, and the fun more than outweighs any problems.

I'm just amazed by how little the WSJ article actually said about the place, seeing as how they only mentioned 1/10 of the things you can do there. And they were incorrect about the big slide. It's actually about 9 stories tall, going from the 10th floor to the 1st. Bah, the state of journalism.

Anyway, cool place. Visit if you can.

Re:One of the best places anywhere... by FutureDomain · 2010-05-03 11:32 · Score: 1

And they were incorrect about the big slide. It's actually about 9 stories tall, going from the 10th floor to the 1st.
They were probably thinking of the "big" slide in the main entrance, the 9 story slide is buried deep in the caves where stuffy journalists aren't likely to go.
This place is amazing. I went with a bunch of my college student friends and we had a blast. Getting lost in the caves, finding yet another secret passage, and pummeling kids with bouncy balls (and them pummeling us right back) was incredible. The next time I visit St. Louis, I'm going back there.

--
Hydraulic pizza oven!! Guided missile! Herring sandwich! Styrofoam! Jayne Mansfield! Aluminum siding! Borax!

Superb place to visit (with pics) by PGillingwater · 2010-05-03 07:56 · Score: 5, Informative

I want to add myself to the list of fans of this admirable place....

Here's a set of photos of the St. Louis Museum I took earlier this year.

The experience of climbing the spiral staircase, while listening to live music from the massive pipe organ was almost surreal...

--
Paul Gillingwater
MBA, CISSP, CISM

Re:Playgrounds by sconeu · 2010-05-03 07:56 · Score: 1

I used to love those "vomit machines".

Curse those Darwin Award candidates for taking them away!

--
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.

Interesting Dynamics by odin84gk · 2010-05-03 07:57 · Score: 1

Everything has warning signs, so people are used to assuming things are safe unless posted otherwise. The city museum is slightly different. You have to assume (slightly) dangerous. If your kid can't handle a Steep slide, don't let them on it.

It took me a while to grasp the concept, let go and have fun. I have hit my head, I have almost gotten stuck, but that is why it is a Must See for any guest that visits St. Louis.

+1 for the museum by Anonymous Coward · 2010-05-03 07:59 · Score: 1, Interesting

I love the city museum. Shame on anyone who would sue. Take some risk, go have fun and accept what you get when you come out of there: sweat, nicks, bumps and bruises.

If you want a "safe" playground go play at McDonalds.

Re:+1 for the museum by Locke2005 · 2010-05-03 11:09 · Score: 1

Has anybody every been to a McDonald's playground that didn't have a pervasive odor of urine? Safe from falling and getting hurt, maybe. Safe from infectious diseases, definitely not!

--
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.

City Museum by XaviorPenguin · 2010-05-03 08:00 · Score: 1

I have been there numerous times to the City Museum. In my opinion, if you don't walk out of there with at least a bruise or two, you didn't play hard enough. There are rules, yes but the rest is common sense. It seems to me that these individuals that had gotten hurt didn't have any to begin with and decided to start suing.

City Museum in St. Louis is a safe place, again, you have to have common sense.

About the Alcohol part...that is only served outside in a little shack of sorts. It isn't served inside at all. Yes the little shack outside connects to the inside but there is a bouncer or two that states that you cannot go beyond a certain point with your drinks. ID's are checked to verify your age.

Museum is open late on Friday and Saturday until 1AM, that is the latest they stay open.

In cooler months, they have a fire pit inside the jungle gym of sorts where people gather to not only get warm but occasionally, roast marshmallows and have smores. The fire was maintained by an adult not of the City Museum, but an adult with common sense.

The City Museum in St. Louis is a great experience time and time again. Every time I go, I always find something new I had not seen before. I enjoy going there and will be returning again toward the end of this month for a birthday party so I cannot wait.

--
Friends help you move...
REAL Friends help you move dead bodies... ^_^

when i was a kid by nj_peeps · 2010-05-03 08:07 · Score: 1

I seem to remember when I was a kid bumps, scraps, scratches and the like were part o growing up. My parents never sued if I fell out of my neighbors tree, and cut my arm. This just seems to be the continuing trend of "you didn't tell me it could be dangous, then it's your fault, pay me" I saw a while back that a fishing lure manufacture had to put a warning label on the package saying "harmful if swallowed" not because of the sharp hooks (as if sharp hooks aren't enough of a deterrent), but because it contained a small amount of lead. Look at how power tools have changed over the years to make them "safer" yet more difficult to use, all so that then you put your fingers in blade while it's on, the manufacture isn't liable of you being a dumbass.

--
"Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security" --Benjamin Franklin

Re:when i was a kid by HikingStick · 2010-05-03 08:57 · Score: 1

One of my youngest boys was screwing around on the front end of a cart (the best place to ride) when he got off, took a few steps ahead, then turned around and split his lip on the cart. "That's life" was my perspective. I asked for a gauze pad and some ice. The store staff were helpful. Of course, there was a report to fill out. I assured them we didn't plan to sue (after all, it was our son who was screwing around and hurt himself).

Fast forward a few weeks. We started getting calls from the store's investigative PR and/or legal teams. Each time they called, they offered us a settlement for the harm caused to our son. Time and again we explained how it happened, but they kept making offers. Only after about six weeks did the calls finally stop. I was just shocked at how quickly they wanted to throw money at us, just because of fear over lawsuits.

--
I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
Re:when i was a kid by blair1q · 2010-05-03 10:42 · Score: 1

Your verbal assurance at the store wasn't enough to give them proof you'd never sue, and as long as there was a chance you'd sue, there was a chance it would cost them a cartload more than the sum they were offering you.
I'm actually somewhat puzzled that they didn't have you sign a hold-harmless agreement after one of those phone calls. Though I'm also heartened that they didn't lead with a demand that you sign a hold-harmless before making the offers.
Re:when i was a kid by HikingStick · 2010-05-06 03:31 · Score: 1

I actually offered to sign forms over the phone, but nothing was ever sent to me. Thinking about it in hindsight, I wonder if there was some such verbage on the accident report I filled out at the store. Either way, it always seemed odd that they were so eager to cut us a check.

--
I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...

Re:Playgrounds by eln · 2010-05-03 08:09 · Score: 1

Gravel? When I was in elementary school the entire playground was covered in asphalt. Flying off the merry go round meant losing a good chunk of your skin as you slid across it, and yet we still all hung on to the very edge for dear life.

Those metal slides were also far superior to the plastic ones with the steel rivets that they have now. The slides today are basically static electricity collecting devices with the occasional steel discharge point to make sure kids get plenty of static shocks on the way down.

Re:Playgrounds by allawalla · 2010-05-03 08:18 · Score: 1

We still have one in my little town outside of Austin, TX! - Not sure if my son is willing to get on it again though.

Re:Playgrounds by Chris+Burke · 2010-05-03 08:23 · Score: 1

Typical kid's park now has wussy plastic equipment with shredded tires on the ground. Bah!

Actually, I'm all for the shredded tires. The more padded the ground, the more risks you can take on the playground and still be able to come back to play the next day!

I mean, jumping off a swingset at it's very highest point is great fun, unless you break your ankle the very first time you do it. When I was a kid you had all the equipment but it was usually on sand. I was very glad it was sand and not asphalt when I would try to go down the slide standing up and invariably slip near the end!

It's the same reason today that I'm glad the floor of the rock gym is padded, and when I'm climbing real cliffs I use a rope (or a crash pad when bouldering)

It's cus climbing around -- and maybe getting scraped up in the process -- is fun. Road rash or broken limbs are not fun. :P

--

The enemies of Democracy are

One of the MUST SEE places in STL by jdharm · 2010-05-03 08:27 · Score: 2, Informative

I lived in STL for 5 great years and took many, many visitors there. Every one of them was taken aback by the price of admission when they got there and every one was exhausted and saying it was totally worth every penny when they left.

Not only is the place a great playground for kids and adults alike, but some of the examples of architecture and industry that is displayed and incorporated into the Museum is beautiful and amazing to anyone who is into that kind of thing. The terracotta architectural pieces are totally rad.

One of the coolest 'exhibits' in the CM is "Caves". Nine stories of concrete and steel, molded into caves to explore. Walk along and see a hole in the wall...crawl in and see where it goes. Some spaces were tight enough to scare me, some passages went down and I found myself crawling through a rebar tunnel on a ceiling 20ft above people on the floor. There's a couple spiral slides that drop down through 4 or 5 stories. And the last time I went there was an automatic pipe organ that seemed to fill every spare inch of space in the building pumping out circus music, along with a bank of robotic percussion instruments behind some steel grate.

If you go to STL for any reason and you are between the ages of 1 and 101, you have to go. You won't be disappointed.

110 Percent Awesome by gcanyon · 2010-05-03 08:34 · Score: 2, Insightful

I've been to the City Museum several times, and it is an incredible place. They have an aquarium, a pipe organ, caves, a circus school, a ten-story slide, a bank vault door, and a hall of insects, and that's just scratching the surface. Here is a collection of pictures I took: http://gcanyon.posterous.com/st-louis-is-amazing and a few more: http://gcanyon.posterous.com/more-pictures-from-the-city-museum-in-st-loui

It's definitely true that this place leans more towards fun than safe: if you don't have bruises, you haven't seen the museum. But common sense will keep you from most harm, a

He's not done yet. by LaminatorX · 2010-05-03 08:36 · Score: 3, Informative

There's an old industrial site north of downtown that Casilly wants to turn into a water park with the same ethos. It's stuck in permit hell, but I'll continue to hold out hope.

Re:Playgrounds by Locke2005 · 2010-05-03 08:42 · Score: 1

They are still around, I've seen them on plenty of playgrounds in Oregon. I use them to demonstrate the principle of conservation of angular momentum, by organizing groups of kids to lean as far out as they can while I push as fast as I can to get it going, then see how it speeds up as everybody moves to the center, and slows back down again when everybody moves back to the outside. It's not just fun, it's Physics! (And yes, I was fully aware that some of the really young children (e.g. 4 year old) participating in this experiment might have gotten hurt. But I didn't care.)

--
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.

Re:Playgrounds by Locke2005 · 2010-05-03 08:45 · Score: 1

When I was in school (in Alaska), the entire playground was covered in snow! Parkas and 3 foot deep snow make for great Rugby games! After school, we used to climb trees and jump off into snow. This became a problem once as a broken branch hidden under the snow penetrated my boot when I landed, but fortunately didn't do much damage to me.

--
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.

Not for the timid by codepigeon · 2010-05-03 08:53 · Score: 2, Informative

I have been to the CM a couple times. It is definately a lot of fun. One word of caution though, there are some places there (that i found while trying to keep up with my son) that can trigger claustrophobia.
I have to agree with others that it is a must see.

Re:Not for the timid by bar-agent · 2010-05-03 10:58 · Score: 2, Funny

One word of caution though, there are some places there (that i found while trying to keep up with my son) that can trigger claustrophobia.
That is a good educational experience right there. Most people don't normally get to see what claustrophobia is like until they go crawling around in caves.

--
i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]

Re:Playgrounds by cgenman · 2010-05-03 09:08 · Score: 1

The only advantage of plastic slides is during the winter. Plastic slides + snow = basically a frictionless surface. Metal seems to provide a higher degree of friction in cold weather, though that could just be my impression.

Obviously, some physics thesis is waiting to be written on this.

--
The ______ Agenda

Also Hosts Good Shows by Jhyrryl · 2010-05-03 09:30 · Score: 1

I went there to see Fishbone. Combining a show with playing in the exhibits and having a few drinks makes for a really good time.

--
Jhyrryl

Re:Have you met Bob? by blair1q · 2010-05-03 10:44 · Score: 1

This is the only museum I have ever seen where they hide works, and only those that climb to the right places are rewarded with a glimpse.

Ever been geocaching?

Oh man by galadriel · 2010-05-03 10:47 · Score: 1

I have got to get to this place.

I've been to St. Louis. Why didn't anyone ever TELL me??

Love the City Museum by neonleonb · 2010-05-03 11:01 · Score: 1

Yeah, it was great, but I always wondered how they avoided lawsuits. I hope the law doesn't get it shut down--it's just wonderful!

Re:Playgrounds by zippthorne · 2010-05-03 11:09 · Score: 1

But they are evidence that fun has occurred.

--
Can you be Even More Awesome?!

What rule of law?? by bussdriver · 2010-05-03 11:39 · Score: 1

The rules are rigged and the game is rigged! BEWARE of any buzzwords that the political parties frequently SHARE - it means those are the best polled phrases to win you over the quickest from a broad political spectrum. It does not speak to the truth of the statement only that it is highly effective of robbing your thought by evoking emotions and conditioned beliefs they wish to exploit.

Legal terrorism is the game and the ones with the most "gunmen" tend to win the battle or by the threat; it is a "civilized" version of the wild west out there. Your odds are about as bad as your rifle is against the hired gunmen except now you have less options in the fight. We can do much better when opposing government; so I must concede that we've made a tiny bit of progress overall.

The lawyers have been destroying law for profit and promotion for a long time. The society has been going along with it as well, being sold on shallow reasoning and marketing slogans. Zero Tolerance is popular today; it should be laughably stupid (because it is.) So, then we regress into that mentality not necessarily due to actual support by politicians or the public but because that is the bill of goods people are sold under a brand name slogan (and lacking depth;) then later, it comes back as pressure for the politician to actually compromise and give people symbolic follow through while neither side really actually wants it. This is especially true when political enemies try to undermine or hijack symbols for their own use so even effective implementations (or lack there of) must be symbolically attacked. Again, not for the good of society or principle but for the GAME - and naturally, delivered behind a poker face.

The GAMING / HACKING of the society is ultimately to blame; the lack of applied of common sense is how foolishness slips bye and this finds its way increasingly into the legal system (which does partially reflect society) so we have judges and lawyers who go by the letter of the law allowing simplistic hacks that they can see but are unable to act against due to false principals emerging as a result of societal rot.

--
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news

One of my favorite places by RebrandSoftware · 2010-05-03 13:53 · Score: 2, Interesting

I took my one year old daughter here on her first airplane trip and we had an absolute blast. I would rank this place as one of the coolest places I have ever been, and the absolute coolest museum ever. I did not encounter anything "dangerous" there that couldn't also be found on a standard playground. I'm looking forward to taking her back when she's 4 or 5 and can really enjoy it. I wish there were more places like the city museum.

It is fun there by cromar · 2010-05-03 14:13 · Score: 1

Yeah, fun place. The glass blowing demonstration was really cool. Some of it's pretty kitschy, but oh well.

Re:Playgrounds by hobo+sapiens · 2010-05-03 16:47 · Score: 1

Snow? Why, when I was a kid we played tag right there in the lava beds. Oh sure, sometimes we'd become engulfed in flames, but that was just part of the fun. The toxic volcanic gasses? Oh sure, we'd pass out from time to time, but losing oxygen to the brain is part of childhood. It never GOONURBLE affected me, gopher tooth SNARF for willing. ARF!

--
blah blah blah

Free Range Kids by bradley13 · 2010-05-03 18:39 · Score: 1

If you agree with the parent, and have kids of your own, visit Free Range Kids!

--
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.

Re:Playgrounds by BobMcD · 2010-05-04 02:18 · Score: 1

We would have been lucky to have had lava beds! When I was a kid we played in the toxic clouds of Venus, and we liked it!

Awesome by VanHalensing · 2010-05-07 02:33 · Score: 1

I've been once or twice, and the place never ceases to amaze me. It's fun to play on, and the exhibits are cool too. Everything is so unique and fun, and yet it is all historical parts of St. Louis. I suggest it to anyone traveling there.

Re:Have you met Bob? by oldspewey · 2010-05-07 03:44 · Score: 1

Some how he has built a place people love to go - and love to learn. Perhaps our public schools could learn a thing or two from him.

I am suddenly reminded of the book Brain Rules, which discusses the fact humans evolved on the African Savannah, and that we are wired to do our best thinking and learning while active. The book goes on to state that modern schools and workplaces probably couldn't be made worse from a cognitive perspective even if we actively set out to design them in the worst possible way.

--
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?

Slashdot Mirror

St. Louis Museum Offers Thrills, Chills, and Lawsuits

115 of 140 comments (clear)