plettza

That had crossed my mind too.

Me too. Ben and David recorded their account, whilst edited, almost immediately after the incident occurred. MSC, it took them three days for a response. Again, if this was simply a privacy issue stemming from a complaint, I doubt, by B&D's account, they would've been yelled at. I just think some manager onboard saw the previous MSC video and flipped out.

I don't think it's that clear cut. I read MSC policies here in Australia and they state their rules and arbitration is that of the state of New South Wales. There's no mention of Panama law prevailing on their ships in and out of Australia. It'd be interesting to know which jurisdiction's laws and regulations prevailed on Europa on this cruise.

I'm not talking about just annoyances on cruise ships; as I said life is full of annoyances. So if someone leaves a fart in the elevator just as you get in, who will you point it out to? To me, that'd be an annoyance of life. I bet you you won't report that annoyance to anyone; you'd simply go about your day a little annoyed. If someone buys the last salt and vinegar packet of chips from the supermarket and that was the flavour you desired, you'd point that out too? If they don't serve Johnnie Walker scotch at a bar you've stumbled upon but serves Dewars instead, would you then point that out too or just adapt and overcome? Of course, you're free to express your opinion but that is different to pointing out a complaint.

I'm not talking about just annoyances on cruise ships; as I said life is full of annoyances. So if someone leaves a fart in the elevator just as you get in, who will you point it out to? To me, that'd be an annoyance of life. I bet you you won't report that annoyance to anyone; you'd simply go about your day a little annoyed. If someone buys the last salt and vinegar packet of chips from the supermarket and that was the flavour you desired, you'd point that out too? If they don't serve Johnnie Walker scotch at a bar you've stumbled upon but serves Dewars instead, would you then point that out too or just adapt and overcome? Of course, you're free to express your opinion but that is different to pointing out a complaint.

From my standpoint... I have never sailed MSC and being in Australia and am not really in a position to boycott them or sail them as they have virtually no presence here. I really have no skin in the game. I just think MSC didn't like Ben and David's video from the other year. Once they worked out who B&D are, they got butt hurt.

That you stated "this time" proves this was an arbitrary call by MSC. I think most people would agree, the way MSC "did something' is the issue. You don't simply yell at your suite guests and insist they are no longer permitted to memorialise their cruise in any form.

Someone, somewhere posted this link yesterday: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Country_specific_consent_requirements In Japan, you need permission to snap someone's pic from what I'm reading here so I guess if you don't have that permission, you can blur their identity out. The blurring of one's face may not be entirely out of courtesy but one of law. At the end of the day, MSC had no idea about how the video would be edited, what it would show and what it wouldn't. My feeling is they just assumed Ben and David were out to do a hit piece and over-reacted. Anyone who thinks the genesis of this ban is solely about some random person's privacy is delusional.

And again, this begs the question. How would MSC know if Ben and David would or would not blur faces during post production? MSC only found them filming in Yacht Club and demanded they cease. Blurring of faces, etc. is handled in post. MSC had no way of knowing how the final video would be outputted. On this, MSC presumptiously canned Ben and David from capturing raw footage.

There are a lot of things in life that annoying. Deal with it. If you want to minimise annoyances, buy or hire a private yacht and then you've all the privacy you desire.

So the issue isn't being filmed as such but rather the purpose of the filming. That's a completely different proposition. People are whinging about being filmed as opposed to being on a YouTube video.

And this is a point. How did/could MSC staff know that Ben and David woudn't have blurred faces in post production? They didn't know.

Get a seat in parliament and table a private member's bill to change the law.

I'm not appying any standards here. Every cruise ship I've been on has CCTV cameras on it. That's a fact. They don't need your consent to operate those cameras. Stay at home if you don't wanna be seen in public.

You might be quite upset to learn there are cameras all 'round the ship that record 7/24 and they don't need your "consent". If you're that concerned about privacy, stay in your own dwelling where you have an absolute right to privacy.

Here's my take (which is what it's worth on an computer screen). First. Yes, MSC absolutely has the right to prevent these two from filiming. The space/ship is privately owned and MSC can dictate whatever rules they want on that said ship. But, can they discriminate against some people and not others and enforce a policy that seems to be confected at that point? There's an implied right of access to a private space that makes it somewhat public. Yes, MSC can you to stop filming, etc. but they should stop everyone from filiming at which point, Ben and David could claim discrimination (whether real of inferred). Why have many other YouTubers created MSC vidoes and not been stopped? The policy should be applied evenly. I would be pissed if I wasn't allowed to take a bottle Scotch onboard a Carnival ship but others were becuas ethe policy was applied relaxed. And for those who screech "privacy" concerns at Ben and David... Sorry to tell you, but every cruise ship I've been on has 24/7 CCTV running. Grow up and if you don't like being recorded, stay at home.

If you look at the deck plan of both Spirit and Splendor, you'll notice no forward pool on Splendor. You only have the midship and aft pools. And I agree with ddvgww that Serenity is nowhere near as good as on Spirit. I think maybe becuase the bar is so small and it serves people within Serenity as well as those outside. One thing that really annoys me about Splendor is on deck 9, to walk from the Lido Marketplace to the forward inside area, is not entirely covered. So if you've got a plate of food from the Lido Marketplace and you want to take it to your room, you walk forward past the midship pool but get funneled into the entry between Red Frog and Blue Iguana bars. This area in not covered. In Port Vila, I brought back some breakfast from the Lido Martketplace and it rained really heavily. I found the seats in the Spectacular Spectacular and Lido Marketplace to be really low as . Lastly, if you look at the Splendor deck plan, you see where the Gold Pearl restuarnt is a small atrium area. It gets really crowded when people rock up for dinner and the elevators just get packed, Just be aware of this if you are unable to use the stairs. I can't say that Splendor is my favourite ship. I would much prefer Spirit or Legend return to Australia. The Spirit-class layout is just really logical.

I will say, we cruised aboard Splendor the first time back in January/February and weren't too impressed compared to our numerous sailings aboard Spirit and Legend. I found most of the seating, such as lounges and seating in the Lido Marketplace too low. I was disappointed they took away Blue Iguana Cantina which made burritos and tacos, etc. This was an undiscovered treasure in the morning for breakfast burritos if the Cantina is still available on Spirit and Legend. I do agree the Carnival Deli makes great sandwiches and the Masala Tiger is another excellent option onboard Splendor. I was also frustrated with the access to the Gold Pearl restaurant located aft. There's a small atrium where dozens of people gather waiting to get into the dining room. There's no thoroughfare from the main area of deck 4 to the Gold Pearl. You need to to five and then down. I also found the food was better onboard Spirit and Legend pre-CoVID. On the Lido deck (deck 9), where our stateroom was located, we found you need to walk outside on the lido area to make your way the Marketplace. This is problematic if it rains, which it did in Port Vila. If you're carrying food back, there's not much covered area so if it's raining, you might get wet. Speaking of the Lido, Splendor lacks the three-pools Spirit and Legend have. On Splendor, there's a pool mid-ship and one located aft. Lastly, tender access is slow and challenging. Tenders are (mostly) loaded/unloaded from the top rather than the sides. This means people take forever to walk down or up the tenders' stairways. However, that said, were booked on again in October. Given the choice from Sydney, I would take Spirit or Legend over Splendor any day.

You (or other readers) mightn't be aware there's a temperature safety feature on the dial. It's physically stopped at 30°c or so but there's a latch on the dial that needs to be depressed whilst turning the to adjust the temperature of the water. It's not that evident how it works straight away.

Sorry for the belated reply. I'll check with Carnival but I might try and book something just to use up the credit.

Back in 2020, I had a few Carnival Cruises booked and either fully paid for or deposits placed. I have about $2400 in FCC. When the cruises were cancelled, Carnival gave the option of a full 100% refund OR retaining the monies paid and $900 onboard credit to use on future sailings. I got a call from a Carnival personal cruise planner. I asked her how much credit I had and she gave me an approximate figure as shown above. However, to use my FCC, I would need to book and sail by end of March next year; she claimed I would lose it after that point. She also said I have already lost the $900 onboard credit which Carnival offered at the time. Considering Carnival resumed sailing in Australia back in October last year (2022) which doesn't give much opportunity to sail, how can Carnival simply claim that the money I paid for my cruises will simply expire when they didn't deliver the service? ACCC doesn't have any specific information and other searches just bring up results from 2021. Carnival's help pages relate to its US operations and the personal cruise planner I presume is based in the US and may not be familiar with Carnival Australia's obligation in relation to Australian consumer law. Is anyone dealing with this predicament and what advice do people recommend?

We also got off Splendor and come to think of it, we weren't offered coffee or tea after our meal in Gold Pearl. I remember they would usually come around with a box of speciality teas and ask if we wanted something like that but were given the opportunity to order the free tea or coffee at the end after dessert. I don't much drink coffee or tea so I didn't think about the omission until this thread appeared. I did notice that on our 11-night cruise, we never got the laundry promotion ($25 AUD) Carnival often run during the voyage. I asked my stateroom attendant about it who got me a bag. I completed it, filled it to within an inch of its physical limits and he took care of it. Checked my account and sure enough, the promotional price of $25 AUD was charged. I wonder if this is a tactic for reducing costs for Carnival in that staff don't offer free/discounted services or items if avoidable.

This was the wine menu from the Gold Pearl restaurant current as of last week. QRAUS_AT_WineList_1022.pdf

I used Medibank Private and once purchased, they provide a letter outlining COVID-19 coverage that is easy for the port check-in person to quickly confirm.