Speaking of rules, HAL's not worried

[lknick]

Does anyone see the irony here?

In this forum, we devote hours and enormous amounts of emotion to worrying about how, whether and how much to tip the smiling crew who work so hard for us --- how to deal with chair hoggers --- how to dress properly when rules aren’t enforced --- how to keep the smokers and non-smokers from going nuclear --- how to deal with children in adult pools and babies whose swim diapers leak --- the best smuggling methods to get booze into our cabins…. Etc etc etc.

And, HAL’s response to all these burning issues? They reduced options [adding $10/day to every passenger’s cruise cost, changed the in-cabin liquor rule] and hired more security.

Apparently they’ve taken the view that they can’t please everybody so if the participants get too rambunctious, they’ll just call in the muscle.

Whenever the minority refuse to conduct themselves in an appropriate manner and sing ‘It’s my vacation’ in a squeaky voice, then the majority must suffer. Things that were optional become mandatory.

…the non-smokers are becoming more militant all the time. We have a dedicated security person during the day for the Lido now. Enough said.

HAL’s having a record revenue year despite all of our worries. To quote Alfred E Neuman “What, me worry?”

[Orcrone]

You guys are gonna have a good cruz, or me and some of my boys will have a talken to ya.

[tomc]

Ok, so I'm not always as swift as I'd like to be. Maybe I'm missing something here and I honestly do want to be told if I am.

The person who posts as "HAL employee" (be it true or not), says: …the non-smokers are becoming more militant all the time. We have a dedicated security person during the day for the Lido now.

That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I've taken lots of cruises on HAL and I have never seen anything even remotely resembling militancy. During the time when smoking was allowed in the Lido (which I think it is not anymore), us non-smokers would just sit away from the smoking area.

If there was a security person assigned to the Lido on my latest cruise, that person must have been disguised as an Indonesian waiter.

[localady]

The only "militancy" on the ship I saw was the endless searches for booze etc on the way in from port!! :rolleyes: Oh, and there might have been some crowd control necessary when the Ice cream bar ran outta Vanilla with butterscotch sauce!:eek:

[lknick]

Dismiss and ignore.

The facts are there are now 18 security people on Vistas and 16 on S class, doubled since last year. All but two are plain clothed and look just like other passengers.

The number of interventions reported due to militancy has trippled in the last year.

And the Lido includes outdoor areas plus the restaurant. Smoking has not been allowed in the restaurant area for a number of years but on the deck smoking is allowed in certain areas.

My post was not designed to bring out the anti-smokers any more than it was to encourage the parents of babies in swim diapers to protest. It is designed to show just how silly we become worrying about all of this stuff, and those who can do something about it don't care.

And I resent the inference that the quote is not valid.

[RevNeal]

The number of interventions reported due to militancy has trippled in the last year.

Define "militancy."
On the Volendam last year a Russian couple (well, they were speaking Russian with what sounded like a Moscow accent, so .... ) lit up in the Lido toward the end of lunch. No one did or said anything to them. The cloud of smoke floated right over us and, since we were finished, we decided to get up and leave. Hypothetically, had we decided to ask them to stop smoking, would we have been tackled by a plainclothesman and thrown into irons while the smokers are allowed to keep puffing?

[Leslieswiger]

Most people do not know about the added security. I feel a lot of people are afraid or do not want to know just what is going on.:( The more one knows what going on about them the better for all.;)
I thank you for your thread even though some may be upset.
WE must have RESPECT and look out for one another:D

[lknick]

Militancy, requiring an incident report to be created, is where security must counsel a cruiser on the error of their actions.

There are specific guidelines about incident reports, and one of the categories is 'Militancy'.

Anecdotal data is seldom valid. Statistics gained from counting reports tells more of the story than a one cruise one incident tale.

[sail7seas]

:confused: I'm not sure I get the point.


Because someone who holds themselves out to be an HAL employee has written somewhere to someone (for both of which I must have missed the identification) does not care about the stated issues, does that mean we should not care/express what it is we are concerned about? Should we not have and state opinions about the experience we hope and expect to be buying for our vacation dollars?

This one person states he/she does not care; by extension, should we assume all of HAL authority does not care?

Please excuse my confusion if you think it is patently clear that our opinions as customers means nothing.

[RevNeal]

Militancy, requiring an incident report to be created, is where security must counsel a cruiser on the error of their actions.

You didn't define "militancy," you just told me what Security does when they see it. WHAT is "militancy"? This is a crucial question ... I want to know if I'm going to jeopardize my cruise if I ask a fellow passenger to put out their cigar if they light up next to me in the Lido. Is that militancy? Or, by militancy, do they mean someone yanking a lit Lucky from someone's lips and stabbing it out against their foreheads?? ;)

[lknick]

Oh by goodness Sail, you do have a double standard.

You consistently tell us of your inside information providers but never identify who they may be, but want others to identify their information sources.

It is my understanding that little action is taken by management based on any posting on these boards. Yes, Rev got himself a job by posting a complaint, but that is not exactly a policy change.

This board, and others like it, are fun in that so many different views surface...and so many different types of statements are put forth...but in the big picture, these boards are nothing but amusement.

Rev...Since I do not have a copy of security's guidelines before me, I can only give you my definition, which will have no validity. I recognize your agenda starting effort.

[sail7seas]

No, lknick. I do not have a double standard. Whether this "HAL employee" is identified is really not relevant to me.


The point of my message is that just because ONE HAL employee expresses his/her lack of interest in any of those issues, are we to infer automatically that all HAL employees in "postions of power" share that lack of interest?

[RevNeal]

It is my understanding that little action is taken by management based on any posting on these boards. Yes, Rev got himself a job by posting a complaint, but that is not exactly a policy change.

:D ... well, it's a volunteer job ... but I get to cruise for free once a year in return for preaching, the eucharist, a Bible study or 3, and being on-call for pastoral care emergencies. Not a bad deal, if you ask me! :D

This board, and others like it, are fun in that so many different views surface...and so many different types of statements are put forth...but in the big picture, these boards are nothing but amusement.

These boards are certainly an amusement -- a way to pass the time between cruises -- however I wouldn't say that they're "nothing but amusement." Even relative to the "big picture," they serve an important role in information exchange: passengers helping passengers, answering questions, giving tips as to where to go, what to see, what to expect, what to be ready for, what to do, and not to do. This may not mean much to a Cruise line's "big picture," but it does to me and my "big picture." Amidst the amusement, I've also learned a great deal about cruising -- secrets that I hadn't learned in my 7 years of cruising before I joined here.

Rev...Since I do not have a copy of security's guidelines before me, I can only give you my definition, which will have no validity. I recognize your agenda starting effort.

Huh? :confused: My only agenda is to find out what is militant behavior that will cause one to get "talked to" by security. :) Not that I'm a militant person ... I'm not likely to get caught in such a quandary. I have, however, asked people who have butted in line to move to the back. I got a bad look, once, and was called an interesting name by a "lady" (her mouth demonstrated that she wasn't acting like one, but I'd rather be polite) who refused to move. I simply ignored her from that moment forward. :)

[lknick]

The point of my message is that just because ONE HAL employee expresses his/her lack of interest in any of those issues, are we to infer automatically that all HAL employees in "postions of power" share that lack of interest?It all depends on the source.

Here is the exact quote from an email. I don’t think it reflects a lack of interest, but rather of dismay.

“I think the smoking problem is worse on the new ships - at least I hear more complaints from that direction. ...the smoking areas are smaller, the ship is bigger, and the non-smokers are becoming more militant all the time...“

There was more in the email about other issues. And that's all there is to that.

[anngie]

Don't you think that the increased number of security guards is for the increase in the threat of the security of the passengers and the ships by terrorists? Somehow, I cannot imagine someone being taken away by undercover police to an undisclosed location for questioning just for lighting up a cigarette. All you need is more no smoking signs posted in conspicuous places or a Lido supervisor to tell the person to put it out.
I am a non smoker who has allergies and my husband is Asthmatic. I don't care if there are designated places on ships for people to smoke. If there is smoking in the Ocean Bar we just move away from it. The only thing that really bothers me is cigar smoke on the balconies. Somehow we always seem to be next door to a cigar smoker.

[lknick]

Why are we following Rev's lead and jumping on smoking. Ah...let me think? Could it be that non-smokers are militant?

Smoking was only mentioned in passing along with dress, kids, chair hogs, crew compensation...all of the hot buttons...in my origional post.

[BorderLady]

Don't you think that the increased number of security guards is for the increase in the threat of the security of the passengers and the ships by terrorists? No. I think it’s due to the increase in disrespectful behavior. On a recent HAL cruise, our party witnessed a conversation in a bar that turned into very noisy gay-bashing with taunts and threats of violence. Security came and took away the verbally abusive folks.

Somehow, I cannot imagine someone being taken away by undercover police to an undisclosed location for questioning just for lighting up a cigarette. All you need is more no smoking signs posted in conspicuous places or a Lido supervisor to tell the person to put it out.
On the Zuiderdam last fall, I observed the following: all the smoking tables were taken, many by people who were non-smokers (as evidenced by them relocating ashtrays to that ledge above the scupper). After determining there was no empty smoking table, a man sat down at a table occupied by a couple and lit a cigarette. They immediately started to protest. It got loud. They shouted he should extinguish the cigarette. He replied they were at a smoking table. It got even louder. Security arrived, couldn’t get the couple quieted down so they took them away. Where and for how long? I don’t know. But I never saw them again in the smoking area.

[jhannah]

Fighting or warring.
Having a combative character; aggressive, especially in the service of a cause: a militant political activist.
n. A fighting, warring, or aggressive person or party.

[BorderLady]

Thank you, jhannah -- that very accurately describes the angry non-smoking couple in the smoking area. :)

[lknick]

Don't you think that the increased number of security guards is for the increase in the threat of the security of the passengers and the ships by terrorists? If such is the case, why did the number of incident reports treble in the same period? Must be security was bored and needed something to do.

[anngie]

I don't know if non-smokers are militant. I am a non-smoker but certainly are not militant about it. As long as someone does not blow smoke in my face I don't care if there is a smoking section of a restaurant or if there are designated smoking areas on a ship. It has always bothered me that people are allowed to smoke in their cabins because of the risk of fire plus the fact that my husband has Asthma attacks. We don't stay in smoking rooms of hotels and would prefer not to have a cabin that someone has smoked in.
Maybe some non-smokers are militant. I don't know. Some people are militant about lots of causes and social issues. It seems to me that the fashion police are pretty militant on this board.

[RevNeal]

Why are we following Rev's lead and jumping on smoking. Ah...let me think? Could it be that non-smokers are militant?

Could be. Smoking is always a hot subject on this board. It never has been with me, however. All I wanted to know was what defined "militant" behavior on the part of non-smokers (since smokers, it would appear, are not being militant when they light up in the no-smoking areas). But, if you're going to cast me as a trouble-maker or a militant on this thread, I'll go post somewhere else.

Besides, jhannah answered my question with an excellent definition. Since I'm not likely to do any of that -- nor what Boarderlady described -- I'm not in danger of being pulled aside by ship security. :)

Smoke 'em if you have 'em. ;)

[cactuslady]

Security arrived, couldn’t get the couple quieted down so they took them away. Where and for how long? I don’t know. But I never saw them again in the smoking area.

How mysterious! Does anyone have inside information on whether there really is a plank and whether disruptive passengers are made to walk it?

[lknick]

Rev, here’s a few thoughts.

1. My interpretation was that you wanted me to provide HAL’s definition of ‘militant.’ This I could not do as I did not have it. The definition provided by jhannah is from the dictionary, and accurately describes the actions of some.

2. No where did anyone say that smokers could not be…and never were…inconsiderate. Some do just smoke wherever they want to but I have never seen one lecture a non-smoker.

3. I don’t see any attempt to cast you as a trouble maker. You do, however, have a tendency to parse. “I’ll go post somewhere else” sounds like sour grapes.

4. I intentionally hit all of the hot buttons, as I explained. Why did you, and everyone else, pick up on smoking? What happened to the others?

My point is simple: There is nothing to make me believe that all of our yammering, parsing, opinionating, point-of-view taking, emoting, tail flapping or anything else has any impact on HAL’s decision making process. If you look at this board as the passing of information, amusement or taking a moment to clear the mind after a challenging activity, then we are in keeping with the boards abilities.

[lknick]

How mysterious! Does anyone have inside information on whether there really is a plank and whether disruptive passengers are made to walk it?Maybe they were sent to their rooms without dinner. "No soup for you!"

There is, however, a brig on each ship. I think it's called 'the detainment facility.'

[Linerguy]

"I intentionally hit all of the hot buttons, as I explained. Why did you, and everyone else, pick up on smoking? What happened to the others?"

Perhaps because the quote you posted from HAL employee only mentions smoking and not chair hogging, booze, children, etc.

That was the bait, folks took it and now you're trying to throw it back in their face.

[RevNeal]

lknick,

3. I don’t see any attempt to cast you as a trouble maker. You do, however, have a tendency to parse. “I’ll go post somewhere else” sounds like sour grapes.

1. I believe I was responding to your statement that I was exerting an "effort" to start an "agenda." I was also responding to your reference to "my lead" on the smoking issue. Those references made me think you were accusing me of focusing this on smoking, as if I had some form of a nefarious agenda.

2. Yes, I have a tendency to parse. So do you.

3. No sour grapes. I just don't want to be thought of as causing a fight. If I'm causing trouble, tell me and I'll move on to another topic. I kind of had already, but your giving me your thoughts occasioned my response.

4. I intentionally hit all of the hot buttons, as I explained. Why did you, and everyone else, pick up on smoking? What happened to the others?


It was your quote of what the HAL employee said -- "…the non-smokers are becoming more militant all the time." -- not so much your remarks, that caught my attention. Sorry. :)

There is nothing to make me believe that all of our yammering, parsing, opinionating, point-of-view taking, emoting, tail flapping or anything else has any impact on HAL’s decision making process. If you look at this board as the passing of information, amusement or taking a moment to clear the mind after a challenging activity, then we are in keeping with the boards abilities.

I sometimes think that we (yes, myself included) bloviate just to read ourselves bloviating. Said more positively, we're sharing because we enjoy sharing. Anything else is speculation or anecdotal ... including the event when my reference to being turned down for Chaplain duty got reversed. What that demonstrated was that someone at HAL HQ was reading the board close enough to catch the remark and act upon it; it doesn't demonstrate that we have an impact on HAL's decision making process through what we write on this board. If I want to really try and do that, I write a physical letter to Seattle ... and, even then, I don't assume that my lone voice registers as anything more than a minor squiggle on their meter.

[RevNeal]

Perhaps because the quote you posted from HAL employee only mentions smoking and not chair hogging, booze, children, etc.

Correct. And, you're right, I fell for it. :) Good call. :) That's what I get for spending my day off doing nothing but browsing around the internet. :D

[BorderLady]

Maybe they were sent to their rooms without dinner. "No soup for you!"

There is, however, a brig on each ship. I think it's called 'the detainment facility.'

Cactuslady, as part of their new Signature Of Excellence, they could do it in pink, with velvet wallcoverings -- but with no Room Service or soft-serve ice cream.

[cactuslady]

Now I have another question. 'Vegas Jim, what does your dictionary say "bloviate" means? I looked it up in my trusty old Webster's New World from 1970, but it's not in there. :confused:

[jhannah]

To discourse at length in a pompous or boastful manner: “the rural Babbitt who bloviates about ‘progress’ and ‘growth’” (George Rebeck).

[lknick]

Perhaps because the quote you posted from HAL employee only mentions smoking and not chair hogging, booze, children, etc.

That was the bait, folks took it and now you're trying to throw it back in their face.You give me much more credit than deserved in deviousness. Never thought of the connection.

No matter what compliments you rain on me, I still didn't like the QM2.

[ryansmemom]

Actually, research shows that Hot Pink is the color that calms people down. I don't know why, but it would be a good color to paint that detention room. :D

************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** **************************************************


Linda

[HeatherInFlorida]

Whatever anyone may say is the reason for additional security, I agree with Anngie that the "real" reason is concern about possible terrorism. HAL will not tell us this because the last thing they need is us fearing for our safety, i.e., people will stop cruising.

So there may well be an increase in "incident" reports because people are aware there is more security. So it has to at least appear they are there for another reason. I doubt very much the couple referred to earlier were taken away and thrown in the brig. More likely they were ushered somewhere and issued a nice little shipboard credit to make them feel better.

Nope, I believe it's all a cover to explain away the additional security. You'd have to be living under a mushroom not to know that there are enormous concerns about terrorism on cruise ships. It's not like it hasn't been done.

As for these Boards being for amusement only, thereby suggesting they have no material value, I disagree along with RevNeal. I can promise you I certainly wouldn't spend so much time on here purely for amusement. While it can be enormous fun, I also have gathered volumes of valuable information without which I couldn't make the intelligent decisions I've made about cruising over the past couple of years.

[lknick]

To quote Freud, "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

OMG, that has to do with smoking. Bad me!

[BorderLady]

Actually, research shows that Hot Pink is the color that calms people down. I don't know why, but it would be a good color to paint that detention room. :D

LindaNice catch, Linda! I started to specify the wall color as Baker-Miller Pink but decided to not get technical. The research and anecdotal reporting is fascinating.

Wonder if CC would consider using it as a background color on these pages? :)

[cactuslady]

Thanks, 'Vegas Jim, for all the definitions. Now I have one . . .

Perhaps the Cruise Critic boards exist as a place for critics to ply their trade.

Critic, n. A person who boasts himself hard to please because nobody tries to please him.

There is a land of pure delight,
Beyond the Jordan's flood.
Where saints, apparelled all in white,
Fling back the critic's mud.

And as he legs it through the skies,
His pelt a sable hue,
He sorrows sore to recognize
The missiles that he threw. -- Orrin Goof.

The above definition is from Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary (which comes in more handy than Webster's sometimes).

[RevNeal]

I still didn't like the QM2.

Now I'm curious. Why? Have you posted a review someplace where I can read it? I know this isn't on-topic, or even for the board ... but ... I'd like to hear your opinion.

[HeatherInFlorida]

To quote Freud, "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

OMG, that has to do with smoking. Bad me!
And sometimes .....(as we should all know very well by now:rolleyes: ) .... it's not.

[RevNeal]

Wonder if CC would consider using it as a background color on these pages?

If they did that we'd get confused with the Gay Cruisers board. :eek:

[lknick]

So there may well be an increase in "incident" reports because people are aware there is more security. Onboard security has seldom been discussed here. How would people know there was increased security since security for the most part is not uniformed?

I doubt very much the couple referred to earlier were taken away and thrown in the brig. More likely they were ushered somewhere and issued a nice little shipboard credit to make them feel better A nice contention. The poster said she observed them being ushered out of the Lido smoking area…nothing more.

[lknick]

Now I'm curious. Why? Have you posted a review someplace where I can read it? I know this isn't on-topic, or even for the board ... but ... I'd like to hear your opinion.OH Rev...I won't go through that flame again.

Try the Cunard board about July 1 or 2.

[RevNeal]

OH Rev...I won't go through that flame again.

Try the Cunard board about July 1 or 2.

Oooh ... flames ... should I take some marshmallows with me to the Cunard board?? ;) Thanks ... I'll search for it over there.

[lknick]

Oooh ... flames ... should I take some marshmallows with me to the Cunard board?? ;) Thanks ... I'll search for it over there.An asbestos suit may more fit the bill.

[anngie]

Iknick, not to beat a dead horse but on the increase in incidents and the increase in security, maybe since there are additional people who are working undercover they are actually witnessing more of these occurrences for the first time.
Maybe these events have gone on before but they went unnoticed or there was no one around who had the authority to do something about them.

[lknick]

One cannot argue with logic. At least it’s better than a conspiracy theory that HAL is trying to mislead its passengers.

Yet, consider the fact that it was 2 years after 9/11 that additional security was placed on board, about the same time as the Vista class ships were added to the fleet, management changed in Seattle and the marketing strategy was revised.

[RevNeal]

At least it’s better than a conspiracy theory that HAL is trying to mislead its passengers.

Actually, that's the objective of the Council of Foreign Relations (you know, HAL is the "Holland Amerika Line" ... obviously an international community plot!) to cause disruptions on all HAL's ships. :) The Trilateral Commission and the Skull & Bones are involved too, I'm sure. :D ;)

[Ziggy7]

I will be on the zuiderdam soon :)
I will check out all this security first hand
and report back :)

[Nasmas]

This is funny. I love these boards, but I really hate to see people get upset over a harmless remark. As for us smokers, someday we'll all be exiled to an island and we can smoke all we want. I've been on several cruises and I've not seen any problems. Most of the smokers know where they can smoke and where they can't. It seems they do honor the 'no smoking' rules. I know some of them are militants too, but if the non-smokers don't want to sit by a smoker, why are they in the smoking area. JUST MOVE. I was in the bar at a seafood restaurant once and the bar was the only smoking area in the restaurant. There was a table of elderly people next to us that keep waving their hands and hacking and giving ugly looks to the people smoking. That only made the smokers smoke more. I didn't say anything but I sure wanted to ask why they were sitting there when the restaurant had numerous non-smoking tables that were not taken. Some people just like to gripe IMHO

[The_Hall_Monitor]

...if the non-smokers don't want to sit by a smoker, why are they in the smoking area. JUST MOVE. ...Some people just like to gripe IMHO

You hit the nail on the head.

A couple years ago on a Panama Canal transit, people gathered in the Crow's Nest. The area was divided in half -- smoking and non-smoking. A man left the non-smoking area seeking a better view. He pushed his way to the front windows on the smoking side, then turned around and snapped, "You people shouldn't be smoking here."

[HeatherInFlorida]

One cannot argue with logic. At least it’s better than a conspiracy theory that HAL is trying to mislead its passengers.I'm curious about your veiled reference to my earlier comment. I never suggested there was a "conspiracy". Nothing so devious. I merely said there is probably another reason for additional security other than ushering smokers or non-smokers from the Lido Deck.

There is a reason for plain clothes security ... it is there so that we don't notice it. Otherwise they would be uniformed. As to how long there has been added security, I question your information. We were scheduled for a Windstar (Holland America) cruise in November of 2001. Because of 9/11 we decided to cancel. However I was assured by Windstar that Holland America had placed additional security on all their ships for the added protection of their passengers.

So while you may not have been aware of it, I would hasten to suggest that it existed earlier than you may think.

[Vicar]

I don't know REV , you might get pulled over by security just for looking "Sneaky" *LOL*

I personally can't see them locking you up in the brig or even "counseling" you for smoking. Unless it got truly out of hand.

if you are smoking in non smoking area and a security guard says "Sir this is a non smoking area please extinguish the cigarette or move to the smoking area", and you comply , thats the end of the story.

Now if the security guard asks and you throw the cigarette in his face and curse at him. Weeeeeeellllllllllll then you may see some militant behavior *LOL*

[The_Hall_Monitor]

Whatever anyone may say is the reason for additional security, I agree with Anngie that the "real" reason is concern about possible terrorism. HAL will not tell us this because the last thing they need is us fearing for our safety, i.e., people will stop cruising.

So there may well be an increase in "incident" reports because people are aware there is more security. So it has to at least appear they are there for another reason...

Nope, I believe it's all a cover to explain away the additional security.

Think about it: conspiracy theorists (regardless of what the conspiracy might be about) always use phrases like "the 'real' reason", "(they) will not tell us", "it's all a cover to explain ...".

I'm guessing lknick's comment was in jest, but I read your post as suggesting HAL has a **secret** plan in operation to make the passengers feel like everything is just like before 9/11.

Who knows? Maybe you're right.

I think it would be neat if there was a paragraph or two in the docs saying, "In view of current conditions, HAL has increased their security force and added other means to assure your cruise is a pleasant one, unmarred by any untoward events."

I'd be very happy to hear that action steps had been taken to address the terrorist issue as well as bullies in bars, squatters in the Lido lounge chairs, smoking areas, etc.

[lknick]

I question your information. We were scheduled for a Windstar (Holland America) cruise in November of 2001. Because of 9/11 we decided to cancel. However I was assured by Windstar that Holland America had placed additional security on all their ships for the added protection of their passengers.I think, I believe, I was told...

If you have a table of equipment and organization before you, as I do, then I will debate the timing and number of security officers.

And again, whether or not the number of security was increased and/or the timing of the increase is not the intent of my post. The intent is to say that HAL has given up on trying to maintain standards and will use security to control those who have gotten out of hand. In this way, they are following Carnival.

And yes, I see your comment to be akin to the 'grassy knoll' theorists. HAL has a great big secret which they are keeping from us.

[sail7seas]

lknick: Given the tone and content of many of your posts now and in the past, I think it pertinent to ask if you are employed by HAL or are a consultant for them. Are you?

[lknick]

As stated in my profile I am retired military and a retired officer from a Fortune 500 corporation.

I am neither currently on the payroll of HAL nor currently act as a consultant to them. I do have professional contacts with current employees.

[localady]

Ilnick reports:
"The facts are there are now 18 security people on Vistas and 16 on S class, doubled since last year. All but two are plain clothed and look just like other passengers."

Well I am not sure what the fuss is, but I say bravo!!!! Prior to 9/11 there were 2 Security Officers as reported by the Chief Security Officer who I had the pleasure of dining with. Post 9/11 I hope to heavens there are now 18 security people on Vistas and 16 on S class, doubled since last year.

The fact is that a cruise ship full of Americans is a target in this day and age, and if HAL and the other cruise lines didn't have security consultants telling them they would be negligent!! I am sure HAL's insurers require it, if not just common sense in this World. They advertise their 2 Million dollars of Art, that has got to be just a drop in the bucket to the value and liability of just one ship.

It doesn't mean we shouldn't cruise, but it does mean that we all have to have a heightened awareness of the current World situation. I feel better that the Ports and Cruise Companies are taking the threats seriously!!

P.S. Iknick-really enjoyed your review on the QE2!, I too prefer the smaller ship and am so excited about sailing on the Prinsendam next summer.

[sail7seas]

Thank you for your response.

The wording was careful but it seems you were once employed by/paid by HAL in one capacity or another?

[RevNeal]

...if the non-smokers don't want to sit by a smoker, why are they in the smoking area. JUST MOVE. ...Some people just like to gripe IMHO

You're correct, on all counts. Likewise, visa versa ... if smokers want to smoke, they shouldn't be sitting in the no smoking section. If I'm in the smoking section -- and I sometimes am, for my mother smokes and I've learned how to live with it -- I expect there to be smoking going on around me. If I'm in the no-smoking section, however, it does irk me a bit if someone lights up at the table next to me. I gave an example of that happening earlier on this thread.

[RevNeal]

I personally can't see them locking you up in the brig or even "counseling" you for smoking. Unless it got truly out of hand.

Well, I don't some cigarettes so the chance of that happening are about zero. My hypothetical question was asked relative to a couple who lit up in the no-smoking section of the Lido. Would security have considered it a militant act if I had asked them to stop smoking. Clearly, based upon a reasonable definition of "militant," simply asking them to stop smoking in the no-smoking section wouldn't qualify. IF, however, I had taken the cigarette from their fingers and ground it out against their foreheads ... yeah ... that would qualify. ;) Since I can't picture myself ever doing that, I'm not in any danger of being "arrested" by the "anti-militancy" police. :D

[anngie]

Smokers and non-smokers can be courteous. If someone is a non-smoker and is sitting in the smoking section he is asking for problems. If a smoker lights up in a no-smoking section he should be asked by the person in charge there to either move or put the cigarette out. If he doesn't then he should be asked to leave the area.
I am glad to see cigar bars on ships. That way hopefully all the cigar smokers will stay in the cigar bar.

[lknick]

The way things are going, I can see the day when a smoker goes into a non-smoking area, waves his arms violently, and shouts, "I'm choking on all this stinky perfume and bad breath. You know, this is offensive and may be dangerous to my health."

This example is just as silly as what I heard on a recent cruise. A non-smoker asked that all ashtrays be removed from smoking areas because the ashtrays were detrimental to his health.
Smokers and non-smokers can be courteous. If someone is a non-smoker and is sitting in the smoking section he is asking for problems. But that’s not how it goes. More than once I have experienced non-smokers sit in smoking areas and demand that others around them stop smoking. When they are rebuffed, they do not move, but complain, lecture, wave their arms and make it generally unpleasant for all.

[RevNeal]

Smokers and non-smokers can be courteous.

Absolutely correct. And, they usually are. It's only those anecdotally rare occasions that get remembered. For the most part, people are courteous on this matter. For example, if we are sitting in a no-smoking area, or in a restaurant that is all no-smoking, my mother doesn't smoke. If we go to an area -- a lounge, a bar, a section -- where smoking is allowed and, indeed, is going on, I kindly accept and tolerate those who are smoking so as to be able to enjoy being there (for whatever reason I'm there). I don't make other people conform to me. I abide by the rules.

[HeatherInFlorida]

Lknick & The Hall Monitor: You are so far off base that it would be laughable if I wasn't so upset. I have not suggested "conspiracy" or "secrecy" and I have not theorized. While I see most of you have turned this into a smoking debate, I'm going to tell you that I am offended by the suggestions made by these two individuals.

I innocently made a remark (agreeing with another pollster I might add) that the security had been increased on HAL ships since 9/11. You state, Lknick, that you have professional contacts at HAL. I neither know nor care whether you do or not.

But for some reason you've got a chip on your shoulder about this subject and some sort of beef with me personally. I don't know why. I did not "hear" or "surmise" the information I gave. I spoke directly with a HAL representative when I wanted to cancel my cruise in 2001 and in fact received a letter shortly thereafter that went to all passengers who would be travelling in the coming few months. They were very clear that they had added additional security personnel to their ships.

You can believe or disbelieve me. I really don't care. I have no idea why you decided to pick on me. I'm just a lady sitting in my house in Florida making a simply observation. To even bring up "grassy knolls" is ludicrous.

No one has a right to accuse me of suggesting any conspiracy or underhandedness on the part of HAL when anyone who has read any of my posts knows that it is my favorite cruiseline.

And now I'm done with this thread.

[chellbird]

I don't want to ruffle any feathers, but I read in an earlier post that one of the touchy issues is kids swimming in the adult pool. When we went on our last cruise, we never saw many kids and didn't realize that there were specific pools for adults only. It wasn't an issue for us last time because our kids stayed with friends. When we sail this time, we don't want to offend anyone, but we certainly want our girls to be able to swim. Are there any other "child etiquette" rules that we need to be aware of? I get the idea that just having them there may be offensive to some people :confused:

[lknick]

I spoke directly with a HAL representative when I wanted to cancel my cruise in 2001 and in fact received a letter shortly thereafter that went to all passengers who would be travelling in the coming few months. They were very clear that they had added additional security personnel to their ships Here’s the arithmetic: Before 9/11, HAL had 2-3 security people on S class ships [there were no Vistas at that time]. My statement was HAL had doubled their security contingent to 16 over the last year. That means a year ago (which is two years after 9/11), there were 8 security people onboard and that number has now increased to 16. Since 8 is greater than 2-3, what you reported was factually correct. But, you reported it out of context to support a contention.

Maybe the first 5-6 added were due to international security concerns. My information and belief says the most recent 8 were not.
While I see most of you have turned this into a smoking debate. Unhappily, this is true. However, it is only one of the issues I mentioned.
No one has a right to accuse me of suggesting any conspiracy or underhandedness on the part of HAL when anyone who has read any of my posts knows that it is my favorite cruiseline. In my opinion, your choice of words [like "the 'real' reason", "(they) will not tell us", "it's all a cover to explain…”] whether intentional or otherwise, indicated you thought HAL was implementing a plan but not letting us know of it for some conspiratorial reason. If you had not written these words, conspiracy would have never crossed anyone’s mind. But for some reason you've got a chip on your shoulder about this subject and some sort of beef with me personally. You can believe or disbelieve me. I really don't care. I have no idea why you decided to pick on me. I'm just a lady sitting in my house in Florida making a simply observation. I'm going to tell you that I am offended by the suggestions made by these two individuals. I neither know nor care whether you do or not.Disagreeing with your conclusions is not picking on you.

This is a forum...a place for discussion and debate. It is beyond me why people cannot have disagreements without reverting to personal barbs.

[sail7seas]

When we sail this time, we don't want to offend anyone, but we certainly want our girls to be able to swim. Are there any other "child etiquette" rules that we need to be aware of? I get the idea that just having them there may be offensive to some people :confused:

Seeing as you have asked this question on at least two threads, you seem to really want a response. I doubt you (or anyone else) needs me (or anyone else) to answer this question but you seem serious about it, so.......



Good manners, courtesy, respect and consideration are always in order and a good way to behave and to teach young children.



I hope you and the girls have a great cruise.....and that all other pax aboard with you do as well.

[The_Hall_Monitor]

I don't want to ruffle any feathers, but I read in an earlier post that one of the touchy issues is kids swimming in the adult pool. When we went on our last cruise, we never saw many kids and didn't realize that there were specific pools for adults only. It wasn't an issue for us last time because our kids stayed with friends. When we sail this time, we don't want to offend anyone, but we certainly want our girls to be able to swim. Are there any other "child etiquette" rules that we need to be aware of? I get the idea that just having them there may be offensive to some people :confused:Children’s cruiseship etiquette? I would think the same rules apply as in any other situation where a large number of strangers congregate.

In my opinion, I think it’s not true that HAL passengers dislike having kids on board. One sees people look at each other and smile when well-mannered kids come by, then often they’ll speak to the kids in a friendly manner.

What they don’t like is kids screaming and yelling, running helter-skelter through a crowd, doing cannonballs into a crowded pool, bumping into people, etc. In short, all the same things NO ONE likes anyplace else!

Regarding pools – the big Lido pool is for all passengers. Kids can go there at any time but as a matter of courtesy, if its crowded, it would be best if kids do not play vigorous games with lots of splashing and screaming. The other pool is posted “adults only” but when its empty (and it frequently is), there seems to be no problem with kids using it. However, if adults decide to go in the water and the kids will shift their activities to quiet water play, I doubt they’ll be asked to leave.

Regarding other locations such as dining room, theatre, etc. – you’ll see that mannerly behavior will make them the object of very positive attention with smiles, nods and maybe some nice compliments.

[ryansmemom]

Children’s cruiseship etiquette? I would think the same rules apply as in any other situation where a large number of strangers congregate.

In my opinion, I think it’s not true that HAL passengers dislike having kids on board. One sees people look at each other and smile when well-mannered kids come by, then often they’ll speak to the kids in a friendly manner.

What they don’t like is kids screaming and yelling, running helter-skelter through a crowd, doing cannonballs into a crowded pool, bumping into people, etc. In short, all the same things NO ONE likes anyplace else!

Regarding pools – the big Lido pool is for all passengers. Kids can go there at any time but as a matter of courtesy, if its crowded, it would be best if kids do not play vigorous games with lots of splashing and screaming. The other pool is posted “adults only” but when its empty (and it frequently is), there seems to be no problem with kids using it. However, if adults decide to go in the water and the kids will shift their activities to quiet water play, I doubt they’ll be asked to leave.

Regarding other locations such as dining room, theatre, etc. – you’ll see that mannerly behavior will make them the object of very positive attention with smiles, nods and maybe some nice compliments.


Well said. I agree. I think the parents of children get unnecessarily defensive when it comes to having children on a cruise ship. In general, most other people enjoy having well behaved people of any age sharing their vacation with them. A wild, unruly child is just as disruptive as a wild, unruly adult.

We took our 3 year old grandson on our November cruise on the Maasdam and took responsibility for his behavior. When he was in public, he was very well behaved. Our cruise was centered on his needs. He was not overtaxed or over tired. People who were with us told us how much they enjoyed his company.

Other children are just as welcome as my grandson was. They will be just as appreciated and accepted if their parents act responsibly and insure that their children behave appropriatly. The problems occur when the parents do not control their children.

Linda

[Seadoc]

Kudos to lknick for his spot-on, razor-sharp and comprehensive analysis: "...My point is simple: There is nothing to make me believe that all of our yammering, parsing, opinionating, point-of-view taking, emoting, tail flapping or anything else has any impact on HAL’s decision making proces...".
HAL's biz position (reduced to its essence):
-We're here to maximize revenue.
-We can't afford to sufficiently offend any pax if they split from us because of that offense. (Hence no enforcement of anything, "rules" or otherwise, other than ad hoc "confrontations" at sea).
-No booze to be brought on board (it impacts negatively on our revenue).
-Smoking areas exist (presumably for smokers...all others should avoid them or suffer silently while in them).
-Kids who do the "#1 or #2 dance" in our pools/hot tubs are the ultimate responsibility of their (irresponsible) parents.
-Seat hogging/saving/claiming is "outside the purview of our rules". (I personally simply move the "personal effects" of the loutish persons who deposit their books/towels/lotions/sandals/etc. on deck prior to hitting the feed line...and NEVER comment on the issue).
Civility, decorum, common sense and empathy are behavior commodities disappearing at warp speed from this society. Fortunately no one has to accept the consequences of that disappearance.