Minors losing their Diamond status…

[Ourusualbeach]

2 minutes ago, Ret MP said:

Please please please, with a pointed/specific answer show exactly where I, if that comment was a backhanded way to accuse me of reading into something.  Don't just say it, show it. The only thing I'm pointing out is that the policy says that you earn points and are granted tier/status.  I think we totally agree that tier/status can change upon reaching 18.  What I contend is that when a youngster gets into the C&A for the first time, he/she starts with 0 points until completion of the first cruise and then that person has earned the number of points that is commensurate with the completed cruise, period.  If the parent has 140 points, the child doesn't get that, he/she gets what they earned, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8....... points.  But, he/she is considered or shares their parent's status of D until they turn 18.  Now, I'm fairly sure that many kids cruise with their parents all the time, in that case, they not only share their parent's tier/status, but they also earned enough points to actually be the same tier/status and wouldn't lose it at 18.  They would not lose their tier/status just because they turned 18.

 

I'm not infallible, that's for sure.  However, when I'm engaged in a discussion, I'd like to SEE where I may be wrong.  I don't see it right now.  I don't have a problem being wrong if I am and I will be humble if I am.  

 

 

 

It was not directed at you specifically its just my own personal opinion based on the way the the policy as written has been applied over the last 10 years at least and there has only been one report of it changing recently however over the past 10 years there have been a few reports of the same thing happening.  Based on that alone I will stick with my opinion that those isolated incidents that have been errors.  Until more reports of the same thing happening emerge I will 100% stick with my interpretation of how the policy is applied regardless of how you and others interpret the policy.

 

I have said my peace and will not be replying to any more posts in this thread since it is pointless.

[Morecruisesplz]

6 minutes ago, Ret MP said:

I"m not infallible, that's for sure.  However, when I'm engaged in a discussion, I'd like to SEE where I may be wrong.  I don't see it right now.  I don't have a problem being wrong if I am and I will be humble if I am.  

 

 

 

Read the post: "and I will continue to post long rants replying to your post until you stop posting."

A full time poster all day long, but rarely cruises who will argue about anything on and on and on.

[A&L_Ont]

6 minutes ago, fredmdcruisers said:

And the timing is in line with many other cost cutting efforts by Royal. 

To do that they should bring in the policy stating that one should cruise once every so many years or lose their status. That would cut out a fair amount of members, some of which probably don’t even remember they are members. 
 

That said, they would have to track all the current members and their IT recently doesn’t seem capable of successfully doing that. 

Edited March 30, 2023 by A&L_Ont

[Ret MP]

1 minute ago, Ourusualbeach said:

It was not directed at you specifically its just my own personal opinion based on the way the the policy as written has been applied over the last 10 years at least and there has only been one report of it changing recently however over the past 10 years there have been a few reports of the same thing happening.  Based on that alone I will stick with my opinion that those isolated incidents that have been errors.  Until more reports of the same thing happening emerge I will 100% stick with my interpretation of how the policy is applied regardless of how you and others interpret the policy.

 

I have said my peace and will not be replying to any more posts in this thread since it is pointless.  I totally agree.

But, I'm talking about the written word/policy and you are going off of a couple of experiences and I've stated that I can't argue/debate experiences, what people have gotten away with, and I'm not trying to.

[Ret MP]

6 minutes ago, fredmdcruisers said:

Read the post: "and I will continue to post long rants replying to your post until you stop posting."

A full time poster all day long, but rarely cruises who will argue about anything on and on and on.

Fred, go away, your stalking is getting old!  And I thought you were going to ignore me.  Just another dream dashed.  

Edited March 30, 2023 by Ret MP

[Ourusualbeach]

5 minutes ago, Ret MP said:

But, I'm talking about the written word/policy and you are going off of a couple of experiences and I've stated that I can't argue/debate experiences, what people have gotten away with, and I'm not trying to.

So I lied, I will respond to this.

 

As you have clearly missed it is not a couple of experiences, it is a decade of Royal applying the policy in the manner that I have described.  The one off experiences are the ones that you try to infer is the policy.

[LobsterStalker]

10 hours ago, Ourusualbeach said:

Personally, I think that if this had been a change in policy we would have seen more than 1 report by now.

 

10 hours ago, Ourusualbeach said:

Personally, I think that if this had been a change in policy we would have seen more than 1 report by now.

I never mentioned a 'change ' in the post you're quoting me on

[Ret MP]

1 minute ago, Ourusualbeach said:

So I lied, I will respond to this.

 

As you have clearly missed it is not a couple of experiences, it is a decade of Royal applying the policy in the manner that I have described.  The one off experiences are the ones that you try to infer is the policy.

But, you aren't showing what you say it is in writing. I'm not calling you a liar, I'm saying that based on the written word that it is what it is.  Not what you or others may have experienced for one minute or 10 years.  If you can produce the written words to show me/us that points are granted, this all goes away.  

[A&L_Ont]

18 minutes ago, Ret MP said:

But, I'm talking about the written word/policy and you are going off of a couple of experiences and I've stated that I can't argue/debate experiences, what people have gotten away with, and I'm not trying to.

 

We have seen one post being this thread VS years of what has actually happened. You see it as “gotten away with” because of your interpretation.

 

6 minutes ago, Ret MP said:

But, you aren't showing what you say it is in writing. I'm not calling you a liar, I'm saying that based on the written word that it is what it is.  Not what you or others may have experienced for one minute or 10 years.  If you can produce the written words to show me/us that points are granted, this all goes away.  

 

Instead of debating at length, one could patiently just wait and see if there are mass postings of those hitting their 18th birthday losing their status but keeping their points.  If it is going to change we will see soon enough. 

Edited March 30, 2023 by A&L_Ont

[LobsterStalker]

1 hour ago, graciekelli said:

I have a question on this issue.  Where do you see how many points a child has actually earned?  I never really kept track of the kid's points, just ours.  They have not been on all the same cruises as us, but many of them. Now they are all grown and on their own.  DD (25) and DS (23) are both planning their own "first" cruises without Mommy and Daddy footing the bill.  When we went onto their CAS account, they are both listed as Diamond and have the same exact points as we do, which we know cannot be correct since they didn't go on every cruise we took.  They actually could be Diamond on their own, as we are very close in points to D+, but I don't know for sure. 

 

I told them both that they will just need to see what happens.  They could still be diamond or not.  I have no idea.  My son is married and will be bringing his wife on her first cruise ever.  My daughter lives with her boyfriend and she is bringing him on his first cruise ever.  I am curious to find out what happens.  But, whatever happens, I am fine with it.  My kids did not "earn" anything.  We the parents earned everything.  

And from what I;m understanding on here , both your kids significant others could  also be Diamond after this cruise .... Truly insane in my opinion !

 

Cheers

[Ret MP]

1 minute ago, A&L_Ont said:

 

We have seen one post being this thread VS years of what has actually happened. You see it as “gotten away with” because of your interpretation.

 

 

Instead of debating at length, one could patiently just wait and see if there are mass postings of those hitting their 18th birthday losing their status but keeping their points.  If it is going to change we will see soon enough. 

Right, I patiently waited until I first posted, #180.  All I did was post the policy as written and a quick summary of what it said, and then the debate started.  And again, I don't believe the written policy leaves much to interpret. It's fairly straight forward like I wish so many other policies were.

[LobsterStalker]

1 hour ago, graciekelli said:

I have a question on this issue.  Where do you see how many points a child has actually earned?  I never really kept track of the kid's points, just ours.  They have not been on all the same cruises as us, but many of them. Now they are all grown and on their own.  DD (25) and DS (23) are both planning their own "first" cruises without Mommy and Daddy footing the bill.  When we went onto their CAS account, they are both listed as Diamond and have the same exact points as we do, which we know cannot be correct since they didn't go on every cruise we took.  They actually could be Diamond on their own, as we are very close in points to D+, but I don't know for sure. 

 

I told them both that they will just need to see what happens.  They could still be diamond or not.  I have no idea.  My son is married and will be bringing his wife on her first cruise ever.  My daughter lives with her boyfriend and she is bringing him on his first cruise ever.  I am curious to find out what happens.  But, whatever happens, I am fine with it.  My kids did not "earn" anything.  We the parents earned everything.  

And to make it .. worse , (in my opinion) , let's say each of your children's significant others had 2 children each... then potentially from what some are teaching me here ? .. 6 new diamonds were created with 1 sailing and none of them EARNED anything ..

[LobsterStalker]

1 hour ago, Ourusualbeach said:

You cant, just like you can't see your spouses if they do not have the same number of points as you.  To find this out you need to call C&A.

Couldn't you simply set up an online account for them ?

[twangster]

  

4 minutes ago, A&L_Ont said:

Once a long time ago there was a CC thread to which one person was trying to get their exes C&A membership downgraded because that person married into their status.  The CC member wanted to find out what they could do, who to talk to etc… to get their divorced partner adjusted to their appropriate level. There was never a final post on what happened that I remember.
 

Side note, makes you wonder what that marriage was like. 🤷‍♂️

 

People do strange things during divorce proceedings.  My ex petitioned the court to be granted my airline status during our divorce.  The judge denied it on the basis the court has no power to order an airline to comply with the motion over a free loyalty program.  With all the stuff that was occurring at the time somehow my ex decided that airline status, when she rarely flew, was important enough to be a specific item that she needed.  🤷‍♂️

[LobsterStalker]

1 hour ago, Ourusualbeach said:

If they sailed on the ship, they earned it.  Like air line points, it does not matter who pays only who flies/sails

The points were earned ..I Agree completely

The status was earned.. Disagree. At best the status was matched , but not earned 

 

Cheers

[Ourusualbeach]

2 minutes ago, LobsterStalker said:

Couldn't you simply set up an online account for them ?

Spouses you can, kids under 18 are not allowed their own account.  Either way it will not show their actual points, it will show the highest point level of all those that are in the relationship

[LobsterStalker]

1 hour ago, A&L_Ont said:

The CC member wanted to find out what they could do, who to talk to etc… to get their divorced partner adjusted to their appropriate level. There was never a final post on what happened that I remember.
 

Side note, makes you wonder what that marriage was like.

Lol.. You can have the house and the dog , But I'm keeping the D+ status !

[Ret MP]

"A Crown & Anchor Society member can be added into a relationship with other family members in the same household and receive equivalent tier status; however, Cruise Points will remain according to actual cruises taken and calculated using the Program level accrual system described above"

 

Someone, please explain to me how I'm misinterpreting the above.

 

 

[A&L_Ont]

12 minutes ago, Ret MP said:

Right, I patiently waited until I first posted, #180. 

 

I’m talking 6 -12 months not 180 posts. 

 

12 minutes ago, Ret MP said:

All I did was post the policy as written and a quick summary of what it said, and then the debate started.  And again, I don't believe the written policy leaves much to interpret. It's fairly straight forward like I wish so many other policies were.

Your interpretation of the rules, which might not be followed by RC. Like I said, wait  6 months or more to see what the reports back are from the real world VS the reading of a policy. 

[Biker19]

1 minute ago, Ret MP said:

Someone, please explain to me how I'm misinterpreting the above.

With most issues with RCI there are three possibilities:

 

1. Actual policy

2. What happens most of the time

3. Exceptions

 

Folks can argue till blue in the face on some of these threads (as evidenced in this one) but the majority of folks only really care about item 2 above. You can be right about 1, but few care (unless they want to post whore some more) since they only care about 2 (unless 3 happens often enough).

[molly361]

48 minutes ago, A&L_Ont said:

To do that they should bring in the policy stating that one should cruise once every so many years or lose their status. That would cut out a fair amount of members, some of which probably don’t even remember they are members. 
 

That said, they would have to track all the current members and their IT recently doesn’t seem capable of successfully doing that. 

I agree 👍 

[Ret MP]

1 minute ago, A&L_Ont said:

 

I’m talking 6 -12 months not 180 posts. 

 

Your interpretation of the rules, which might not be followed by RC. Like I said, wait  6 months or more to see what the reports back are from the real world VS the reading of a policy. 

And I keep saying over and over again.  I can't and won't defend what is actually being done.  I'm only pointing out the policy.  We all know that there is a limit to how many bottles of wine are, by policy, allowed to be brought onboard.  But we all know that RCCL looks the other way in MANY cases, employees too lazy to enforce, weak management, whatever.  I can't help any of that but I do know that there is a policy is.

 

Again, I don't think I'm interpreting the policy, it's straightforward.

[LobsterStalker]

52 minutes ago, Ourusualbeach said:

Yes, Royal does seem to be quite good at having policies that are not crystal clear.

I believe This is the first time I have seen you reference that maybe the policy could be interpreted differently . Most on here who are in disagreement with you , myself included , are not disagreeing about how it has been implemented in the past , I think that is clear .

Instead , speaking for myself , and I believe for others,I am saying maybe the policy itself has always been different from the implementation .

Leaving things vague , can often be done intentionally leaving room to change the way you actually enforce a rule ...without actually changing the 'policy'

[nelblu]

12 minutes ago, Ourusualbeach said:

Spouses you can, kids under 18 are not allowed their own account.  Either way it will not show their actual points, it will show the highest point level of all those that are in the relationship

Just for clarification.  Children under 18 have their respective C&A number, but not a physical folio (account) that can be logged in.  

[Ourusualbeach]

Just now, nelblu said:

Just for clarification.  Children under 18 have their respective C&A number, but not a physical folio (account) that can be logged in.  

Correct