Dress Code Observations - Millennium 17 Aug

[BlackPear]

Much has been written on these boards regarding pax observing dress code during a cruise. This is what I witnessed from a male perspective. I took special note and did a rough count at the second sitting.

 

Formal Nights

40% in tux

30% in dark jacket & tie

10% with jacket , no tie

20% casual including jeans

 

Informal Nights

10% jacket & tie

50% in jacket only

40% casual

 

Casual

95% smart casual

5% non-smart casual (attire such as worn out, mis-shapen tee shirts and baseball caps or floppy hats)

 

I have to say I was a little disappointed with the results, many people were making a real effort to keep to the code, but too many seemed to be ignoring it completely. I saw no action being taken on inappropriate dress.

 

It was very hot throughout the cruise though, which may have made a difference.

[tbelian]

Are nice, but without the 'basis' number, hard to judge.

 

40% of ?? how many?

10% of ? 100, 20, 400?

[BlackPear]

800 on the second sitting

[Wilde_37]

Are nice, but without the 'basis' number, hard to judge.

 

40% of ?? how many?

10% of ? 100, 20, 400?

 

 

 

Well usually 40% of ?? refers to 100% !!! Regardless of whether it is 10 people or 1000. Then again - there are statistics and there are damn statistics :)

[Pontius Navigator]

Informal Nights

10% jacket & tie

50% in jacket only

40% casual

 

.

 

What was the published standard? I was under the impression that the 50% were correct.

[ATLfuzzy]

informal nights only a jacket is required for men: no tie required, as per celebrity documents and the dailies.

[ATLfuzzy]

It was very hot throughout the cruise though, which may have made a difference.

 

Not only was it hot outside, but was very humid in various portions of the ship, including our stateroom and the Metropolitan restaurant.

[raudacruise]

Given the Norovirus outbreak I probably wouldn't have worn anything I couldn't get clear (if you get my drift) FAST. Tux with cumberbund and suspenders when doing the kentucky two step probably would not have been a lot of fun. Assuming I was cleared to go to dinner by the medical staff, I'd probably be in something more "comfortable" just in case.

[Drew B]

Given the Norovirus outbreak I probably wouldn't have worn anything I couldn't get clear (if you get my drift) FAST. Tux with cumberbund and suspenders when doing the kentucky two step probably would not have been a lot of fun. Assuming I was cleared to go to dinner by the medical staff, I'd probably be in something more "comfortable" just in case.

 

 

Hopefully if you were one of the unfortunate ones afflicted with Noro, you would have had the good sense to follow protocol and remain quarantined to your cabin so as not to put everybody else at greater risk. And if you were confined to the cabin, you would be more than welcome to eat your dinner NAKED if you prefer...

[raudacruise]

Dupe.

[raudacruise]

Hopefully if you were one of the unfortunate ones afflicted with Noro, you would have had the good sense to follow protocol and remain quarantined to your cabin so as not to put everybody else at greater risk. And if you were confined to the cabin, you would be more than welcome to eat your dinner NAKED if you prefer...

 

Like I said, if the medical staff said OK. Please reread my post. All I was saying is even if the medical staff said OK, I'd probably be a little reluctant to "bundle up" so to speak. I certainly was NOT SAYING I would disobey the ships medical staff.

[Drew B]

Yes, you certainly did say that. My apologies. I don't think you're ever cleared by medical if things are still, um, explosive down there...

[NorCalCruiseGuy]

informal nights only a jacket is required for men: no tie required, as per celebrity documents and the dailies.

 

That's very confusing. The following is from the Celebrity website today--

 

On informal nights, ladies may wear an informal dress or pants and blouse, while gentlemen may wear a jacket and tie with slacks.

 

But the wording in the Celebrity brochure we have indicates that on informal nights men should wear jacket and slacks.

Perhaps they are adjusting the dress code without making a big deal of it??

[NorCalCruiseGuy]

informal nights only a jacket is required for men: no tie required, as per celebrity documents and the dailies.

 

I hope pants are required too!!

[4nlalaland]

Many have commented on the fact that on this sailing it was very hot on the ship....maybe that had something to do with the spread of the virus???

On our cruise (Aug 5 - 17) the air conditioning was working fine.....as far as I could tell.

[raudacruise]

Many have commented on the fact that on this sailing it was very hot on the ship....maybe that had something to do with the spread of the virus???

On our cruise (Aug 5 - 17) the air conditioning was working fine.....as far as I could tell.

 

 

No, viruses in general and especially norovirus can stand a huge temperature spectrum. They are not like bacteria that need heat to incubate/cultivate. They grow/multiply inside you.

 

The reason that washing works is just to get the critters off your skin, you can't really kill them. Some viruses also are areosol infective, meaning make sure you have a kleenex to cover your nose when sneezing. And then go wash your hands.

[Rev22:17]

NorCalCruiseGuy,

 

That's very confusing. The following is from the Celebrity website today--

 

On informal nights, ladies may wear an informal dress or pants and blouse, while gentlemen may wear a jacket and tie with slacks.

 

But the wording in the Celebrity brochure we have indicates that on informal nights men should wear jacket and slacks.

Perhaps they are adjusting the dress code without making a big deal of it??

 

Yes, Celebrity dropped the requirement for a necktie on "informal" evenings a couple years ago. Unfortunately, the line seems to be slow updating its precruise documentation and its web site. At one point, the line was publishing three mutually inconsistent versions of its dress codes.

 

Norm.

[Pontius Navigator]

the line seems to be slow updating its . . . its web site.

 

This it seems is endemic.

 

Many website run to hundreds of pages so it is a full time job, and needs an encyclopaedic knowledge to spot errors. It is the database problem in spades - garbage in . . .

 

My organisation with about 25000 people tries and frequently fails with a budget of £50k. My national newspaper budget for its website was £5million.

 

The core business of Celebrity, et al, ashore it to get punters on board, it is not to run an accurate website. C'est la vie.

[ATLfuzzy]

But the wording in the Celebrity brochure we have indicates that on informal nights men should wear jacket and slacks.

 

This is also what the daily newsletter states.

[tbelian]

800 on the second sitting

 

Oh come on now! You mean you counted every one of the 800 people at second seating to come up with the 40%? There may in fact be 800 people in the dining room , but your 40% figure can't possibly represent every one of those 800 can it?

 

Right.

[tbelian]

Well usually 40% of ?? refers to 100% !!! Regardless of whether it is 10 people or 1000. Then again - there are statistics and there are damn statistics :)

 

What I am suggesting is that if your 40% number is 40% of 100 people that does not necessarily represent 40% of the 800 attendees at dinner.

That percentage could be higher or lower.

[NorCalCruiseGuy]

Oh come on now! You mean you counted every one of the 800 people at second seating to come up with the 40%? There may in fact be 800 people in the dining room , but your 40% figure can't possibly represent every one of those 800 can it?

 

Right.

 

 

Tsk, tsk. He said it was a ROUGH COUNT. Give him a break, ok? He was making an observation, not doing a statistical analysis.

[pattyj 1204]

I agree with NorCal I would guess that someone standing and counting with a clipboard at dinner would distract all in attendance and make me nervous. This was his best-guess %. Let's accept that. Thanks for trying to help.

[tbelian]

I disagree. Statistics can be quite misleading. When I asked what the percentages were based on, the op's response was '800 at second seating'. The numbers can not be based on that response now can they? Unless he counted 800, which could be inferred from his brief response.

 

Here is his response as a refresher:

 

800 on the second sitting

[Drew B]

It depends upon whether the ones he actually counted were, in fact, a representative sampling. There is no way for us to know that. However, as long as he sampled at least a couple dozen, I'd be satisfied that it gives a relatively accurate picture despite a rather wide margin of error...