Regarding the ongoing discussion of letting people out of line to go pee or not letting people back in afterwards: I just spent today up at Six Flags Great America. They have a really simple policy: No line jumping, whatsoever, for any reason. No holding places in lines. If you get out of line, you go back to the end of the line. Period. And guess what else? I didn't see anybody complaining about this policy at all, even to their friends.
I'm former IRT (and hopefully future IRT, I would love to come back), and in my opinion, I see absolutely no problem with this policy. It is not unreasonable to expect people to have the presence of mind to take care of bodily functions such as eating and peeing before they get into a line that they know may last 30-60 minutes, or before they go into an event which they plan to attend for two or three hours. I do realize that with the Soap Bubble, being a rave, hydration is important, and I do understand that emergencies of a bodily variety may arise, and (if the reports on this thread are true -- I haven't heard anything official) I support Rosa's efforts to change the way we handle those events. I also understand that the Soap Bubble is not the only place that this issue arises, but since this thread is regarding IRT and the original issue was with the soap bubble line, that's what I'm talking about here and now.
A lot of people seem to take issue with the line of "the congoer was acting foolishly." I don't recall the post but somebody said it was unfair and offensive to say that. Honestly, though this opinion may offend someone, I have no problem stating that I believe that it is neither unfair nor untrue to claim that someone who can't follow the rules and who can't see past their own nose as to why these rules might exist is being foolish.
Note that I am not saying that it is foolish to need to pee. I am saying that it is foolish to demand that an exception be made to the rules for you. Note, also, that I am not saying that everyone who was in that situation was being foolish. Nor am I saying "oh man, all the congoers suck," because that's not true. As an IRT vet I can say that it is a few bad apples that make everyone else's time worse. For example, if people didn't try to sneak in to the Soap Bubble every year, we wouldn't have to have these rules. But until ALL the congoers are as wise and and honest as MOST of the congoers, those idiots are going to require us to create rules that are a pain for the rest of you. That's unfortunate, but it's a fact of life and it occurs everywhere else in the world too.
[Edited 6/4/08 to clarify that this is my opinion, and added language in blue for even more clarification.]
FlyingElf, the Standard Operating Procedures for IRT have this to say about room parties. Whether or not they are supposed to enter your room depends largely on probable cause, or whether we have a reason to believe that there is underage drinking going on in the room. If we have no reason to suspect that there is underage drinking going on, we are supposed to verify that you are checking identification at the door AND that you have a way of marking underage vs. of-age attendees in the room. If you are not doing so, you may be searched by Hotel Security or by Rosemont Public Safety, which is not our call and which we cannot prevent. On the other hand, if we DO have a reason to suspect that underage drinking is going on, IRT has the right to enter the hotel room because it counts as an "open room" of the hotel by hotel policy. (By admitting members of the general public to your room, as opposed to only the people on the account, the room becomes an open room of the hotel, just like a meeting room. This is how the hotel gives the convention the right to enter the room, which is how we get that right. I'm not an expert in hotel policy, I'm simply repeating what is in the manual, so if you have questions about this, please PM me and I'll look into it further.) If IRT does enter a room, they are supposed to politely ask the people who are suspected of being underage for ID.
So in your situation it sounds like, basically, that the issues were that a) IRT may not have had probable cause to enter the room, B) IRT was not polite while doing so, and c) IRT was demanding ID from everyone instead of just the people suspected of underage drinking.
There is not much that I, personally, can do to rectify this situation, because I am no longer IRT. However, I do keep in touch with the people who are working on the training curriculum for next year. I'll see if I can make sure that they cover this topic more thoroughly.