Would you be excited to visit Idlewild Park in Pennsylvania? It's the third oldest operating park in the States, and it's steeped in that old-timey amusement park feel. Would that get you enthusiastic to see the place, or would your attitude be "It's mostly a kiddie park with two nothing coasters -- no thanks"? Would you be excited to ride Leap-the-Dips at Lakemont Park in the same state, knowing it's the oldest operating coaster in the world, or would you think, "Yet another coaster with an ACE plaque and a dull, forgettable ride"? In other words, are the history and lore of amusement parks a part of your interest, or are you all about the thrill of the rides and nothing else? Which one is closest to you? A. I go to amusement parks for thrills, not museum curiosities. I want awesome rides and don't care about the history of rides or parks. B. Yeah, the historical aspects are kind of cool and I enjoy them here and there, but I'm primarily about the thrills. C. Both the history of a park or ride AND the thrill level of rides are really enjoyable aspects of my amusement park experience. D. The history and lore of parks are my biggest interest. I'm all about the old-school amusement park experience, and thrill rides are fun but less important to me.