Death on Disney Ride

[Karlifornia]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Make something idiot-proof and the world will just build a bigger idiot.

I love this line.

[molson]

Originally Posted by molson

I'm going to say after the 4th severed head maybe they just start leaving the heads there - that should be a good warning.

Ya, I think we've gone full circle, I suggested the head thing pages ago.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by dangarion

But does it really?

Yes. Since people getting into that area could result in death or serious injury, they need a better system than what they currently have. I'm not blaming them for what happened, but when goofballs can find their way into the path of a roller coaster without any sort of alarm going off there is a real problem, IMO. A security setup that primarily relies on people doing the right thing is a bad system. The assumption needs to be that people will not do the right thing and controls need to be in place to prevent disaster when they do finally enter the unauthorized area.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

Yes. Since people getting into that area could result in death or serious injury, they need a better system than what they currently have. I'm not blaming them for what happened, but when goofballs can find their way into the path of a roller coaster without any sort of alarm going off there is a real problem, IMO. A security setup that primarily relies on people doing the right thing is a bad system. The assumption needs to be that people will not do the right thing and controls need to be in place to prevent disaster when they do finally enter the unauthorized area.

This is the same security system that prevents people from throwing stuff at a moving roller coaster...which would be much less dangerous than putting a body into its path. Hell, it is the same security system which keep people from pushing others in front of a bus. You can't protect everyone from everything. At some point you have to trust that people aren't going to just randomly try to hurt other people.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

The assumption needs to be that people will not do the right thing and controls need to be in place to prevent disaster when they do finally enter the unauthorized area.

There was no disaster. An idiot kid climbed TWO fences (and silly me, a fence without ANY signs is still a sign saying "Don't come through here"), got near the big giant hunk of metal travelling at 50MPH, and got himself killed. No one on the coaster was hurt, the coaster wasn't hurt, there was just some cleanup. What disaster again?

Let me ask a different question: should the railroads be forced to place 10 foot high fences with barbed wire at the top, security cameras covering the whole line, and reaction teams at enough strategic spots so that if someone gets on the tracks they can get them off before a train comes through? And how do we guarantee that cars won't stop on the tracks? And to me this is a pretty exact analogy. Most folks know that large high-speed objects travel those tracks, but that does stop kids from racing them on bridges...

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

Yes. Since people getting into that area could result in death or serious injury, they need a better system than what they currently have. I'm not blaming them for what happened, but when goofballs can find their way into the path of a roller coaster without any sort of alarm going off there is a real problem, IMO. A security setup that primarily relies on people doing the right thing is a bad system. The assumption needs to be that people will not do the right thing and controls need to be in place to prevent disaster when they do finally enter the unauthorized area.

Sounds like you need to call your Congressperson.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Let me ask a different question: should the railroads be forced to place 10 foot high fences with barbed wire at the top, security cameras covering the whole line, and reaction teams at enough strategic spots so that if someone gets on the tracks they can get them off before a train comes through?

Oh come on, this is a ridiculous argument. Putting up an extra fence, adding some barb wire, more signs, maybe adding an alarm system or increased surveillance of the area? These are reasonable requests and something Six Flags could certainly manage. Asking a railroad to do what you've suggested is clearly unreasonable. If you guys are going to come up with ridiculous hypotheticals that aren't in any way comparable, then I'd rather we just get back to the shark talk.

And how do we guarantee that cars won't stop on the tracks? And to me this is a pretty exact analogy. Most folks know that large high-speed objects travel those tracks, but that does stop kids from racing them on bridges...

Cars can and have stopped on the tracks. But the great thing is, see we have this alarm system that lets you know when a train is coming. I'm wondering if there were people back then saying, "Why the hell do I have to wait at this gate because some dumbasses can't be trusted to look both ways before passing through a railroad crossing?"

[Shkspr]

Can't we all just get along and blame it on Dan Snyder?

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by BrianD

This is the same security system that prevents people from throwing stuff at a moving roller coaster...which would be much less dangerous than putting a body into its path.

Obviously you make decisions based on the threat and possible results if it happens. Given the distinct possibility of death happening if people enter particular areas during the operation of a ride, it is frankly a little surprising that there is not already an automatic shutdown of a coaster when it happens. Just for the safety of the people on the ride this should be happening, whether you particularly care for the people breaking the rules or not.

Hell, it is the same security system which keep people from pushing others in front of a bus. You can't protect everyone from everything. At some point you have to trust that people aren't going to just randomly try to hurt other people.

A bus rides down the road and I don't find the comparison between a bus and a roller coaster to be particularly compelling. I should have a reasonable expectation that when I am on a roller coaster that I am not going to collide with anything. Some of you think I am blaming Six Flags for this, which I am not. Do I think they could do more to prevent this type of thing from happening? Yeah, I do. Not in the interest of protecting morons wandering around where they shouldn't be, but protecting the innocent riders. So they did not get hurt this time, but the last time this coaster hit a person a rider was injured.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

There was no disaster. An idiot kid climbed TWO fences (and silly me, a fence without ANY signs is still a sign saying "Don't come through here"), got near the big giant hunk of metal travelling at 50MPH, and got himself killed. No one on the coaster was hurt, the coaster wasn't hurt, there was just some cleanup. What disaster again?

This time no riders were injured. Last time it hit a person a rider was injured, though.

Let me ask a different question: should the railroads be forced to place 10 foot high fences with barbed wire at the top, security cameras covering the whole line, and reaction teams at enough strategic spots so that if someone gets on the tracks they can get them off before a train comes through? And how do we guarantee that cars won't stop on the tracks? And to me this is a pretty exact analogy. Most folks know that large high-speed objects travel those tracks, but that does stop kids from racing them on bridges...

I do believe that trains have speed limits in certain areas and requirements to hit the whistle/horn at particular intervals. These are all safety measures. If they weren't trying to do anything, they would just let them go at any speed all the time and never even put a horn/whistle on the damn things.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

Sounds like you need to call your Congressperson.

I don't actually care for it to be legislated. Government should make safety recommendations and if those are ignored, they just bill the company for all expenses when they are called out for an emergency involving that particular location/machine/etc.

[fantom1979]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Oh come on, this is a ridiculous argument. Putting up an extra fence, adding some barb wire, more signs, maybe adding an alarm system or increased surveillance of the area? These are reasonable requests and something Six Flags could certainly manage. Asking a railroad to do what you've suggested is clearly unreasonable. If you guys are going to come up with ridiculous hypotheticals that aren't in any way comparable, then I'd rather we just get back to the shark talk.




Cars can and have stopped on the tracks. But the great thing is, see we have this alarm system that lets you know when a train is coming. I'm wondering if there were people back then saying, "Why the hell do I have to wait at this gate because some dumbasses can't be trusted to look both ways before passing through a railroad crossing?"

I would prefer that my park ticket not go up $10, because the park has to install a Fort Knox type security system to shut down a ride because some retard climbed two fences and got his lid knocked off. We cannot idiot proof everything. This kid was an idiot. It sucks that he died, but sorry kid, sometimes when you make stupid teenage decisions, they are a life changer (or life taker). It happens.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by Shkspr

Can't we all just get along and blame it on Dan Snyder?

Only thing Dan Snyder did wrong was put his trust in Dany Heatley to get him to his destination safely.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by fantom1979

I would prefer that my park ticket not go up $10, because the park has to install a Fort Knox type security system to shut down a ride because some retard climbed two fences and got his lid knocked off. We cannot idiot proof everything. This kid was an idiot. It sucks that he died, but sorry kid, sometimes when you make stupid teenage decisions, they are a life changer (or life taker). It happens.

Whether you care for this moron or not, should riders have to be worried that they might collide with a person? Especially since I do not think there are warnings about that possibility in the queue? What if Six Flags could put motion detectors in certain areas that result in a shutdown of the ride (which I believe is possible on rides like Batman... We aren't talking about an old wooden coaster that is beyond control once it starts down the first hill)? I know Disney has these type of safety features on some of their rides. As soon as something abnormal has been detected, everything stops.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by fantom1979

I would prefer that my park ticket not go up $10, because the park has to install a Fort Knox type security system to shut down a ride because some retard climbed two fences and got his lid knocked off. We cannot idiot proof everything. This kid was an idiot. It sucks that he died, but sorry kid, sometimes when you make stupid teenage decisions, they are a life changer (or life taker). It happens.

Actually, the ride shutdown system is already there. It's just done manually. I'm simply suggesting some kind of alarm system or increased surveillance that alerts the ride operator that someone is in the area so they can activate it. Along with that, a couple more fences, maybe a bit higher with some barb wire.

Anyways, the whole point of my post is that what we're asking of Six Flags is in no way similar to what his hypothetical is asking of a railroad.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Along with that, a couple more fences, maybe a bit higher with some barb wire.

I'm still not convinced that barbed wire is going to be a legal option for them, or at least not one that doesn't increase their overall possibility of issues. And that says nothing about the aesthetic (and possibly psychological) effect it could have.

Please note, I get that the barbed wire isn't the crux of your point, I'm just pointing out that it may not be one of the specific options open to them.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I'd rather we just get back to the shark talk.

Oh yeah!!!!!

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I'm still not convinced that barbed wire is going to be a legal option for them, or at least not one that doesn't increase their overall possibility of issues. And that says nothing about the aesthetic (and possibly psychological) effect it could have.

Please note, I get that the barbed wire isn't the crux of your point, I'm just pointing out that it may not be one of the specific options open to them.

The picture a few pages ago has barbed wire already on the fences at the batman ride. I don't think it's the one in Ga though.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Actually, the ride shutdown system is already there. It's just done manually. I'm simply suggesting some kind of alarm system or increased surveillance that alerts the ride operator that someone is in the area so they can activate it. Along with that, a couple more fences, maybe a bit higher with some barb wire.

Anyways, the whole point of my post is that what we're asking of Six Flags is in no way similar to what his hypothetical is asking of a railroad.

All of this for something that's happened exactly once in 8 years and you're not calling it excessive??

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I'm still not convinced that barbed wire is going to be a legal option for them, or at least not one that doesn't increase their overall possibility of issues. And that says nothing about the aesthetic (and possibly psychological) effect it could have.

You aren't suggesting it would disrupt their fantastic "Gotham City" theming, are you?

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by Axxon

All of this for something that's happened exactly once in 8 years and you're not calling it excessive??

Personally speaking, they can keep doing things just the same way they always have. But I would like it if next time it happens they can pick up the dime instead of the local emergency services or the insurance companies of guests.

This is what is known as "accepting the risk." If they didn't like this offer, they could choose to implement some new mitigation strategies.

I understand this may not be how it really works, but it is the way I would prefer to see things work.

[fantom1979]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Actually, the ride shutdown system is already there. It's just done manually. I'm simply suggesting some kind of alarm system or increased surveillance that alerts the ride operator that someone is in the area so they can activate it. Along with that, a couple more fences, maybe a bit higher with some barb wire.

Anyways, the whole point of my post is that what we're asking of Six Flags is in no way similar to what his hypothetical is asking of a railroad.

How much do you think it would cost to put up motion sensors (and relays) at every roller coaster in every park in the US? How many people do you think would get hurt on a roller coaster suddenly stopping from 60 MPH (or higher) to a dead stop, because a bird just flew by the motion sensor?

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by fantom1979

How much do you think it would cost to put up motion sensors (and relays) at every roller coaster in every park in the US? How many people do you think would get hurt on a roller coaster suddenly stopping from 60 MPH (or higher) to a dead stop, because a bird just flew by the motion sensor?

I would expect them to fine tune the system for humans in order to minimize false positives. You can already do that for home burglar systems, external lights, etc.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Axxon

All of this for something that's happened exactly once in 8 years and you're not calling it excessive??

An alarm system and a couple higher fences. No, I don't think that's excessive. And it has happened twice in 8 years, which is actually a pretty high number for a roller coaster.

In fact, the only two other deaths I could find in the history of SFOG were heart related incidents, one in 2006 on the Goliath (awesome ride!) and one in 1989 on the Z-Force (terrible ride, good riddance). So in the entire history of SFOG, Batman is the only ride to strike someone, and it has happened twice. So yeah, I think maybe adding some extra security would be a good idea.

Speaking of the Z-Force, they replaced it with an eqaully bad ride, which is called the Ninja. This is an absolutely brutal ride that beats you up from beginning to end. It makes the Great Scream Machine seem smooth. If they could sell the Ninja to pay for the extra fences (which is all it would be worth AFAIC) then I'd be happy.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by fantom1979

How much do you think it would cost to put up motion sensors (and relays) at every roller coaster in every park in the US?

I already dealt with this nonsense. It doesn't have to be done for every single coaster. I'm suggesting it for the Batman ride at SFOG. I don't know what security is at other parks, although we did see that one of them does have barb wire. The Batman and rides like it are a specific case because they hang below the track. The same danger is not there for the other rides, which is why none of them have struck a passenger in the entire history of SFOG.

How many people do you think would get hurt on a roller coaster suddenly stopping from 60 MPH (or higher) to a dead stop, because a bird just flew by the motion sensor?

You realize that modern rides already have these things, right? You ever hear some noise when you straighten out after a lift? It's running through the section where there are brakes, and that's usually the slowest part of the ride. I'm not suggesting bringing people to a stop from 60mph, although there's a fun part at the end of the Scream Machine where it feels like that.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

An alarm system and a couple higher fences. No, I don't think that's excessive. And it has happened twice in 8 years, which is actually a pretty high number for a roller coaster.

In fact, the only two other deaths I could find in the history of SFOG were heart related incidents, one in 2006 on the Goliath (awesome ride!) and one in 1989 on the Z-Force (terrible ride, good riddance). So in the entire history of SFOG, Batman is the only ride to strike someone, and it has happened twice. So yeah, I think maybe adding some extra security would be a good idea.

Speaking of the Z-Force, they replaced it with an eqaully bad ride, which is called the Ninja. This is an absolutely brutal ride that beats you up from beginning to end. It makes the Great Scream Machine seem smooth. If they could sell the Ninja to pay for the extra fences (which is all it would be worth AFAIC) then I'd be happy.

It's happened once. The second case was a park worker. Surely you're not suggesting that a higher fence would stop an employee from being on his job? Now, that's just silly.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Axxon

It's happened once. The second case was a park worker. Surely you're not suggesting that a higher fence would stop an employee from being on his job? Now, that's just silly.

Not as silly as pretending that's the only security measure I suggested.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

You realize that modern rides already have these things, right? You ever hear some noise when you straighten out after a lift? It's running through the section where there are brakes, and that's usually the slowest part of the ride. I'm not suggesting bringing people to a stop from 60mph, although there's a fun part at the end of the Scream Machine where it feels like that.

So if the person crosses the sensor at the point the ride is going 50 mph it's still going to hit his head like this one did. That'd really help.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Not as silly as pretending that's the only security measure I suggested.

Right, the stopping the slower cars and ignoring the ones already going fast enough to chop off a head. I forgot about that one.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Axxon

So if the person crosses the sensor at the point the ride is going 50 mph it's still going to hit his head like this one did. That'd really help.

I have never, ever said that there is a way to completely prevent these types of things from happening. All I am saying is that on the only ride in the park's history that has killed someone, and it has happened twice, maybe measures should be put into place to make the area more restrictive. Not sure what's so radical about that.

[Axxon]

[quote=larrymcg421;1768432]An alarm system and a couple higher fences. No, I don't think that's excessive. And it has happened twice in 8 years, which is actually a pretty high number for a roller coaster.
[quote]

Even giving you the second one it really proves everyone's point. There just aren't that many really stupid people out there and it's not that important to super security your park for them. I refuse to consider 2 examples in eight years as a significant statistic or trend worthy of amusement park panic mode.

[larrymcg421]

[quote=Axxon;1768469][quote=larrymcg421;1768432]An alarm system and a couple higher fences. No, I don't think that's excessive. And it has happened twice in 8 years, which is actually a pretty high number for a roller coaster.

Even giving you the second one it really proves everyone's point. There just aren't that many really stupid people out there and it's not that important to super security your park for them. I refuse to consider 2 examples in eight years as a significant statistic or trend worthy of amusement park panic mode.

What's with all the hyperbole? I fail to see how what I've suggested is "amusement park panic mode."

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Axxon

So if the person crosses the sensor at the point the ride is going 50 mph it's still going to hit his head like this one did. That'd really help.

So you can't do everything, then that means you should do nothing?

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I have never, ever said that there is a way to completely prevent these types of things from happening. All I am saying is that on the only ride in the park's history that has killed someone, and it has happened twice, maybe measures should be put into place to make the area more restrictive. Not sure what's so radical about that.

For one thing, it grants a false sense of security and gives little moron's parents the idea that their little angels are perfectly safe no matter how dumb they are and will lead to lawsuits since as has been stated, this would suggest that Six Flags agrees that their perfectly reasonable measures weren't enough. That's almost not even a risk but a given in our sue happy culture.

Plus, the next time someone dies, they'll have to do something else and eventually, you will be suggesting sharks. Everything else will have already been tried and there's no point in the chain where you won't be able to say that x would have stopped occurance y. Sometimes, enough really is enough.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

So you can't do everything, then that means you should do nothing?

If they had done nothing you'd have a point but they've taken more than reasonable precautions. They have TWO fences for god sakes and if the picture of the sister park is accurate they have barbed wire on them and a sign.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Axxon

If they had done nothing you'd have a point but they've taken more than reasonable precautions. They have TWO fences for god sakes and if the picture of the sister park is accurate they have barbed wire on them and a sign.

But you're talking past tense, which is a completely different perspective than where I'm coming from. I own Six Flags. I don't want people getting killed by one of my rollercoasters, whether they are stupid or not. I don't want people to get into that restricted area. So I will do something about it.

[Axxon]

[quote=larrymcg421;1768473][quote=Axxon;1768469]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

An alarm system and a couple higher fences. No, I don't think that's excessive. And it has happened twice in 8 years, which is actually a pretty high number for a roller coaster.


What's with all the hyperbole? I fail to see how what I've suggested is "amusement park panic mode."

I don't know. I'd call spending the kind of money needed to prevent that level of death, at least 50% of which wasn't their fault ( don't know what the employee was doing ) is overreacting.

Right now they have perfectly reasonable measures in place to prevent injury and it's 100% effective to regular park visitors. Bypassing them took willful effort and that's when the game becomes out thinking those who willfully put themselves into harms way and that's not a game you can ever really win.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

But you're talking past tense, which is a completely different perspective than where I'm coming from. I own Six Flags. I don't want people getting killed by one of my rollercoasters, whether they are stupid or not. I don't want people to get into that restricted area. So I will do something about it.

Then next month someone bypasses that security system. Your exact paragraph above is now again 100% valid. When does it stop? Even you have stated that there's no perfect security system.

Might as well just jump to the sharks now at that point.

It all hinges on what really is a reasonable deterrant. I think they've implemented reasonable ones but you believe they haven't because this guy ignored them. That's where the difference between us lies.

[larrymcg421]

Shrug. This really is going around in circles.

I get that the kid is stupid and everyone is upset that the park will now have to do something because the kid was stupid. Still, I think it is a good idea for the park to do something. Two deaths in 8 years doesn't sound like alot, but when it's the only two deaths you've had in the park's history and they've happened on the same ride, I think you stand up and take notice.

I don't think I can put it any better than that. Feel free to disagree, but I don't think my position is unreasonable.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I think you stand up and take notice.

Had he only not done A but done B....

[larrymcg421]

Now this guy was really stupid...

[RainMaker]

What do you guys want them to do? Build an f'in moat around the ride? A 30-foot high wall with armed guards? The ride had two fences, tons of signs around it. You have to make one hell of an effort to get inside that. There is just no way you can possibly avoid these accidents, nor should theme parks be burdened with spending money on adding more security for the .00000000001% of the population that is so dumb we're better off without them.

And yes, people get hurt by other idiots all the time. It's part of life. Perhaps if we keep letting these morons get decapitated before they're able to reproduce, we won't have to worry about this crap in a few generations.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Perhaps if we keep letting these morons get decapitated before they're able to reproduce, we won't have to worry about this crap in a few generations.

That's like saying we should put a bullet in the head of every bad driver so that everybody left will be good drivers. It's never going to happen. There will always be people who don't think the rules apply to them.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

What do you guys want them to do? Build an f'in moat around the ride? A 30-foot high wall with armed guards? The ride had two fences, tons of signs around it. You have to make one hell of an effort to get inside that. There is just no way you can possibly avoid these accidents, nor should theme parks be burdened with spending money on adding more security for the .00000000001% of the population that is so dumb we're better off without them.

And yes, people get hurt by other idiots all the time. It's part of life. Perhaps if we keep letting these morons get decapitated before they're able to reproduce, we won't have to worry about this crap in a few generations.

Well, not just a moat.

[larrymcg421]

I was reminded of this thread as I went back to SFOG the other day. There is now barbwire on all fences on the outside of the park and a Warning sign about every 10 feet.

[stevew]

I wonder if Smurf's been away from the board, killing Disney workers to try to prove a point....or something.

By MIKE SCHNEIDER (AP) – 3 days ago

ORLANDO, Fla. — Walt Disney World canceled a stunt show Tuesday after an employee died during practice, the theme park's third worker killed on the job this summer.

Disney said the deaths weren't related, and federal investigators were treating them as separate accidents.

"The only common thread is the sense of loss we feel for these valued cast members," said Zoraya Suarez, a Disney spokeswoman.

Anislav Varbanov suffered a head injury late Monday while rehearsing an acrobatic move in the "Indiana Jones Epic Stunt Spectacular" and died a short time later. The move required Varbanov to jump into the air, dive over another performer and land in a tuck and roll onto a mat.

"It's worth noting that stunt is a common acrobatic maneuver and has been performed successfully thousands of times since the show was created" in 1989, Suarez said.

Disney World canceled Tuesday's performance in memory of the 30-year-old performer, who had only been with the show a week.

Earlier this month, 47-year-old Mark Priest died four days after being injured in a Magic Kingdom show. He was sword-fighting in "Captain Jack Sparrow's Pirate Tutorial" when he slipped and hit his head on a wall.

Last month, 21-year-old monorail driver Austin Wuennenberg was killed when his train and another monorail train collided.

An Occupational Safety and Health Administration investigator traveled to Disney World on Tuesday to begin an investigation that could take up to six months, said Michael Wald, a spokesman for the U.S. Department of Labor in Atlanta. The latest probe would be conducted separately from investigations into the two other deaths this summer, Wald said.

Some union leaders at the theme park said they were concerned that the resort's hiring of fewer workers this summer might affect safety. The 50,000-plus work force held steady this summer instead of increasing like it normally does during the busiest time of the year for Orlando's theme parks, said Eric Clinton, whose union, United HERE! Local 362, covers custodians, ticket takers and ride operators.

"The parks are open later and there are longer lines," Clinton said. "They need the staff to cover that and that hasn't been the case this summer."

Other union leaders believed that the three deaths were unrelated and didn't reflect a larger pattern of safety concerns.

"They've just been freak accidents," said Donna-Lynne Dalton, secretary-treasurer of Service Trades Council, a coalition of Disney's labor unions. "You also have to consider that Walt Disney World is the size of a small city. When you look at the size of Walt Disney World — and I'm not dismissing the tragedy of any of these events — but I'm just thankful it's not worse."

[stevew]

link to another story on the same thing.

3rd Disney World employee dies in just over month - Florida AP - MiamiHerald.com