smokers revenge

RTCReferee wrote:

Thanks, Howie. I can understand how it happened that you overlooked this. :-)

For the umpteenth time, I will state that all of these smoking/no
smoking issues could be easily solved by having a variety of smoking and
no smoking ships. Hell, with just a few really nice smoking ships, non
of you who have "diminished lung capacity" would ever have to worry
about running into smoke from my cigarettes.

Howie

Charles lid wrote:

Sadly, I have been on "smoking allowed" ships where the bars and
nightclub were dead after 10:00 pm.

So have I. And why not? Liveliness and smoking, or the lack thereof, are not
related, and that's not why bars and nightclubs are sometimes so boring that
people peek in and see nothing of interest and then leave. Some Cruise
Directors and their staff just don't have their act together.

RTCReferee wrote:

Charles lid wrote:


Sadly, I have been on "smoking allowed" ships where the bars and
nightclub were dead after 10:00 pm.


So have I. And why not? Liveliness and smoking, or the lack thereof, are not
related, and that's not why bars and nightclubs are sometimes so boring that
people peek in and see nothing of interest and then leave.

I tend to agree. However, more than once, musicians on ships have
complained that the elimination of smoking in various venues on a ship
has had a major, negative impact on the numbers of people who come to
hear them play. I witnessed this, myself, in the central atrium on the
Carnival Legend this winter. What had been the liveliest area of the
ship, on my two former cruises, was now totally dead.

Howie

Howie wrote:

For the umpteenth time, I will state that all of these smoking/no
smoking issues could be easily solved by having a variety of smoking and
no smoking ships. Hell, with just a few really nice smoking ships, non
of you who have "diminished lung capacity" would ever have to worry
about running into smoke from my cigarettes.

I doubt that this will happen, unfortunately, though we and friends would book
numerous cruises on any ship that meets other important criteria to us that
departs from the West Coast. We would cruise more often and spend more
onboard, since we would not feel we had to avoid certain areas due to
smokiness. (We have never spent a single dime in any casino on any ship, since
it is too smoky in there to concentrate, plus I refuse to spend any money in
smoky areas as a matter of principle, since they are not enjoyable or fully
usable to us.)

The Paradise never sailed from here while it was a non-smoking ship, so it
wasn't under consideration. Also, we want a premium ship/line, one of the best
of the line, not a high-density ship. Give us a Radiance-class ship and we'll
start cruising on RCI. Give us the new Miracle or one of her sisters and we'll
start cruising Carnival. Give us a Sun-class Princess ship and we'll go back
to Princess. Give us any ship in the HAL fleet (except for Noordam, which is
leaving) and we'll cruise on her frequently. And it goes without saying that
the Celebrity Mercury, Galaxy or Century would top our list.

At the very least, during the summer, when so very many ships cruise Alaska,
there is no reason why some ships of each line could not convert to non-smoking
for their Alaska season. Ditto for the 7+day Mexican itinerary which also sees
a lot of ships.

Since people who live on the West Coast tend to smoke less than people on the
East Coast, it makes sense to position non-smoking ships here.

Howie wrote:

I tend to agree. However, more than once, musicians on ships have
complained that the elimination of smoking in various venues on a ship
has had a major, negative impact on the numbers of people who come to
hear them play. I witnessed this, myself, in the central atrium on the

Carnival Legend this winter. What had been the liveliest area of the
ship, on my two former cruises, was now totally dead.

Were these musicians smokers, Howie?
I mean, they were hangin' with you, right? ;-)
(And maybe they felt you were a strong personality and were telling you what
you wanted to hear, or you heard what you wanted to hear.)

Either way, haven't you noticed that each week brings a new set of passengers
who, for a variety of reasons—not just smoking habits—may or may not be
interested in a particular activity or venue or whatever? Maybe something
elsewhere on the ship created a conflict that week. Cruise Directors have a
responsibility to ensure that events are likely to b and so that they are
enjoyable.

There are too many variables to paint such a broad stroke as a place going dead
due to lack of smoke.

I like to boogie, and am damn fine at it, but we had to leave Skywalkers sooner
rather than later, because dancing is an activity that fills the lungs with
whatever is in the room, and the dance floor in Skywalkers was right in the
middle of the smoking section of the lounge. That's negligent, in my opinion.

No one over 50 should dance in public! YUK! haha
"RTCReferee" wrote in message
...
Howie wrote:

I tend to agree. However, more than once, musicians on ships have
complained that the elimination of smoking in various venues on a ship
has had a major, negative impact on the numbers of people who come to
hear them play. I witnessed this, myself, in the central atrium on the

Carnival Legend this winter. What had been the liveliest area of the
ship, on my two former cruises, was now totally dead.

Were these musicians smokers, Howie?
I mean, they were hangin' with you, right? ;-)
(And maybe they felt you were a strong personality and were telling you
what
you wanted to hear, or you heard what you wanted to hear.)

Either way, haven't you noticed that each week brings a new set of
passengers
who, for a variety of reasons-not just smoking habits-may or may not be
interested in a particular activity or venue or whatever? Maybe something
elsewhere on the ship created a conflict that week. Cruise Directors
have a
responsibility to ensure that events are likely to b and so that they are
enjoyable.

There are too many variables to paint such a broad stroke as a place going
dead
due to lack of smoke.

I like to boogie, and am damn fine at it, but we had to leave Skywalkers
sooner
rather than later, because dancing is an activity that fills the lungs
with
whatever is in the room, and the dance floor in Skywalkers was right in
the
middle of the smoking section of the lounge. That's negligent, in my
opinion.

RTCReferee wrote:

Howie wrote:


I tend to agree. However, more than once, musicians on ships have
complained that the elimination of smoking in various venues on a ship
has had a major, negative impact on the numbers of people who come to
hear them play. I witnessed this, myself, in the central atrium on the

Carnival Legend this winter. What had been the liveliest area of the
ship, on my two former cruises, was now totally dead.


Were these musicians smokers, Howie?

Some smoked; some did not.

I mean, they were hangin' with you, right? ;-)

Believe it or not, many non smokers hang with me.

(And maybe they felt you were a strong personality and were telling you what
you wanted to hear, or you heard what you wanted to hear.)

Uh! Pretty presumptuous of you, ref.

Either way, haven't you noticed that each week brings a new set of passengers
who, for a variety of reasons—not just smoking habits—may or may not be
interested in a particular activity or venue or whatever?

Yes, but I spent 16 days on the Legend this year, and 16 the year before
(back to backs). There is no doubt in my mind that on this ship,
eliminating smoking from the atrium, eliminated most of the people from
this spot.

Maybe something
elsewhere on the ship created a conflict that week. Cruise Directors have a
responsibility to ensure that events are likely to b and so that they are
enjoyable.

There are too many variables to paint such a broad stroke as a place going dead
due to lack of smoke.

I like to boogie, and am damn fine at it, but we had to leave Skywalkers sooner
rather than later, because dancing is an activity that fills the lungs with
whatever is in the room, and the dance floor in Skywalkers was right in the
middle of the smoking section of the lounge. That's negligent, in my opinion.

You've got to toughen up those lungs, ref. I would think that living in
one of the most polluted states in the nation, would have toughened you
up already.

Howie

DH and I have "hung" out with Elaine and Howie

SUNNY.........We are both non-smokers and we had a lovely afternoon
with two delightful people.

S'nd I
XXX

You have even hung out with Eileen and Howie and put up with my smoking,
you delightful woman!

Eileen

villa deauville wrote:

DH and I have "hung" out with Elaine and Howie

SUNNY.........We are both non-smokers and we had a lovely afternoon
with two delightful people.

S'nd I
XXX

When you are smokers going to figure it out? Are you also a proponant
of public urination? As stupid an analogy as that may sound, its much
the same. Its not really a health hazard, but its downright disgusting
and it stinks. The same as smoking. You dont have the right to pee in
the casino, and now you cant smoke in most places. Its nothing to get
all excited about. Smoking is not a right, and just because there are
millions of smokers doesnt make it one. Why cant you have sex in
public? Its a natural thing. Everyone does it. But other people dont
like it. So you do it behind closed doors. It part of being a society.
So stop whining please. No one cares.

ando (RTCReferee) wrote in message ...
Howie wrote:

For the umpteenth time, I will state that all of these smoking/no
smoking issues could be easily solved by having a variety of smoking and
no smoking ships. Hell, with just a few really nice smoking ships, non
of you who have "diminished lung capacity" would ever have to worry
about running into smoke from my cigarettes.

I doubt that this will happen, unfortunately, though we and friends would book
numerous cruises on any ship that meets other important criteria to us that
departs from the West Coast. We would cruise more often and spend more
onboard, since we would not feel we had to avoid certain areas due to
smokiness. (We have never spent a single dime in any casino on any ship, since
it is too smoky in there to concentrate, plus I refuse to spend any money in
smoky areas as a matter of principle, since they are not enjoyable or fully
usable to us.)

The Paradise never sailed from here while it was a non-smoking ship, so it
wasn't under consideration. Also, we want a premium ship/line, one of the best
of the line, not a high-density ship. Give us a Radiance-class ship and we'll
start cruising on RCI. Give us the new Miracle or one of her sisters and we'll
start cruising Carnival. Give us a Sun-class Princess ship and we'll go back
to Princess. Give us any ship in the HAL fleet (except for Noordam, which is
leaving) and we'll cruise on her frequently. And it goes without saying that
the Celebrity Mercury, Galaxy or Century would top our list.

At the very least, during the summer, when so very many ships cruise Alaska,
there is no reason why some ships of each line could not convert to non-smoking
for their Alaska season. Ditto for the 7+day Mexican itinerary which also sees
a lot of ships.

Since people who live on the West Coast tend to smoke less than people on the
East Coast, it makes sense to position non-smoking ships here.