NCL Dawn limping from port to port

[Planer's Edge]

That is why a planned down time is better than an emergency downtime. Rebuilding a ship engine is not like rebuilding a small block Chevy engine. Not every parts store around the corner carries parts for ship engines.

 

Exactly my point.

 

The Dawn was originally scheduled for dry dock in November of 2011. The #4 engine "blew a head" and the dry dock was moved up to May of 2011.

 

This latest "engine problem" appeared and they brought in engineers with the hopes of fixing the problem on the fly. That did not happen as quickly as they hoped so the itinerary had to be modified for that specific sailing.

 

Engine #3 is back on line and the Dawn is sailing as she was prior to the specific cruises that had her itinerary modified. Subsequent sailing are back on track but people from those sailings are demanding that the ship be fixed or they be allowed to cancel with no penalty. News Flash the ship is fixed and sailing just fine.

 

Now the typical suspects come out of the woodwork to make sure every one knows that NCL is a horrible, customer cheating, nasty corporation that is out to make money on the backs of their customers with not a care about customer satisfaction.

 

As Swedish has been asking over an over again...what do these people expect in compensation over and above the $200 OBC they received for their inconvenience? I have missed many ports over the years and the best I think I have received is an hour of free Rum Punch (ICK!!!). By my count we have had 5 brand new identities (only one post so far!!) created to come here and say that their vacation was destroyed by NCL not coming forward and allowing people to cancel and change their vacation plans.

 

That just about sums up this whole thread I would think.

 

PE

[Squidward Q Tentacles]

OK...so if we are discussing hypotheticals, if it is acceptable to sail a cruise ship with only two working engines out of four, can the same be said for an airplane with four engines?

 

How about one engine? Is it OK to sail with only one working engine as well?

 

Oh my beloved NCL Dawn....how far you have fallen....

 

Yes, it is okay with two out of four on a ship. Losing engine power in a ship most of the time is not a problem, unless you are in rough seas and need to maintain your bow. Having two engines on an airplane was a huge selling point for small planes, it was said if one engine fails you can continue to fly on one.

 

As for only having one engine, there are big ships out there with just that, one engine. I prefer two engines at least, better for steering and braking.

[sjbdtz]

Court is the only way to decide which opinion is correct if an individual wanted to take it that far.

 

.

 

 

It will never get to court.

 

 

You agree EXPLICITLY in the contract to submit to Arbitration, and that arbitration MUST take place in Miami.

 

 

 

.

[halos]

What difference does it make if it is their first or one and only post?? They are still entitled to their opinion especially if they has first hand experience on this particular cruise.

 

 

 

You're right...the problem is that there have been instances where people create several accounts and post under numerous names just to back up their own agenda.

This makes it hard for the true 'new' people because new people are always suspect due to the childishness of others.

Sad, but true.

[swedish weave]

What difference does it make if it is their first or one and only post?? They are still entitled to their opinion especially if they has first hand experience on this particular cruise.

 

To be clear it would not be my style to just post negative opinions.:)

 

The difference it makes is that some of these first posts are bogus identities established by long time CC people who do it to agitate. I identified one poster who had five different ID's in the course of less than two months.

[Mooder]

What difference does it make if it is their first or one and only post?? They are still entitled to their opinion especially if they has first hand experience on this particular cruise.

 

To be clear it would not be my style to just post negative opinions.:)

 

IMO, it is only relevant if the large number of posts by some is relevant. ;)

 

Not directed at Dutch; To the unhappy cruisers in general: Asking again (perhaps 5th time - I haven't counted), what compensation would have satisfied you? Not made you "happy" - I don't expect you to be happy that you missed ports you had planned for and been anxious for. But what would have satisfied you?

[Jerseyboy1]

Yes, it is okay with two out of four on a ship. Losing engine power in a ship most of the time is not a problem, unless you are in rough seas and need to maintain your bow. Having two engines on an airplane was a huge selling point for small planes, it was said if one engine fails you can continue to fly on one.

 

As for only having one engine, there are big ships out there with just that, one engine. I prefer two engines at least, better for steering and braking.

 

I understand the points you are making, but I prefer to have all systems working when I get on a ship or a plane. The whole idea of redundant systems is that multiple pieces of equipment can be summoned to perform the same job if needed. That's what makes it safer than just having one engine.

 

It may be safe enough to sail that way, but if I was a paying customer, I would hope that the ship is running at normal efficiency.

 

As far as planes go, I don't believe that an airline would knowingly clear a plane for takeoff if it had an engine that was not running. At least I personally wouldn't want to fly in one.

 

That being said, I do think the OP got fair compensation though, even though he sailed on what I believe was an inferior product at the time.

[Globaliser]

OK...so if we are discussing hypotheticals, if it is acceptable to sail a cruise ship with only two working engines out of four, can the same be said for an airplane with four engines?

As far as planes go, I don't believe that an airline would knowingly clear a plane for takeoff if it had an engine that was not running. At least I personally wouldn't want to fly in one.

The safety implications of being two engines down are very different on a ship compared to an aircraft.

 

A "four-engined" aircraft simply can't take off if, at the beginning of its takeoff roll, it's short of one of the main engines. But there's no danger of a cruise ship crashing in a flaming heap just because it's only got two out of its four generators working (and that is, after all, what the "engines" are on a diesel-electric ship).

 

There is actually an analogy with aircraft. Almost all airliners have one more small engine called the auxiliary power unit. This can provide electrical power, cabin ventilation and pressurisation, and the like. Typically, it's used on the ground when the main engines are shut down. However, on many aircraft it's part of the redundancy, and available to be used if one of the main engines fails and its input is needed to maintain the aircraft's systems - keeping the cabin pressurised is quite important at cruising altitude. So it's a bit like one of the main engines on a ship - it's a generator of sorts.

 

Sometimes, the APU isn't working when the aircraft is on the ground. Does that mean that the aircraft can't start a flight? On many aircraft, no: Aircraft often depart and take off on scheduled flights when the APU is broken. Operating procedures are adjusted to allow for this. But if you think that airlines can't/won't despatch aircraft when this extra "engine" is inoperative, think again.

 

The same applies to lots of other systems on board the aircraft. Not everything needs to be in full working order. Aircraft are continually being despatched with broken systems of one sort or another.

[Globaliser]

The clauses you always quote are the U.S. clauses. Those clauses basically say that the cruise line can do anything and is not liable.

 

...

 

In any case, this thread is really not a matter of analyzing the legal details of each jurisdiction.

 

It is about somebody purchasing a cruise and having a reasonable expectation of being taken to the ports scheduled on the itinerary, on a ship that is in working order.

 

You seem to deny that a passenger has that reasonable expectation, which is what I find surprising about your posts.

Actually, I've only posted US clauses once - they were NCL's. I've also posted the UK and EU clauses from two cruise lines for comparison (NCL and RCI). As I've said before, one could argue endlessly about what they mean and how they relate to Package Travel and other legislation (including unfair consumer contracts legislation) - but this isn't the place for it.

 

At a more general level: Obviously, everyone would like to be taken to all the ports on an advertised itinerary.

 

The cruise line would like to do that, too, because in today's industry it loses an extraordinary amount of money every time a scheduled port is skipped. That's a fact that seems to have passed by every poster who seems to think that NCL is doing all of this capriciously and maliciously. The truth is that NCL is financially hurt a great deal every time it does this - so it's not a decision taken lightly.

 

Most of the time, everything works out. That's fine. If it doesn't work out, you're right that the company should - as a matter of customer relations and good will - do something to make amends, even if it has no legal liability to do so.

 

But NCL has made amends. Those who are braying for blood appear to believe that they had a right to go to those ports, and that they therefore have a right to compensation to a greater (but unspecified) extent than what NCL has already done. To adopt a technical term that's been used above, that's balls. The passenger cannot legitimately claim that kind of expectation. The uncertainties of sea travel have always been recognised in the legal approach taken in the contractual terms.

[Sea Monster 2]

It is truly amazing how many cruisers are not members before the go, but when the "ship" hits the fan they manage to find their way here!

 

I just found CC a few months ago when I was deciding on my upcoming cruise. I successfully cruised four times without it, although I will never do so again because it is an extraordinary resource.

 

Re: not coming to CC until after a bad cruise experience, two comments: first, a lot of people lurk here without posting, or only post after some time-- in my case, I lurked for several months before I created an account and started posting. So a first-time poster is not necessarily new to CC. And second, a lot of people hear about CC while they are on a cruise, and come here after to see what it's about and post comments, both good and bad.

[david_sobe]

This thread is getting ridiculous. As always, the truth and common sense is at neither extreme. To call passengers complainers who booked on a broken ship that were reassured the engines were fine and could get them to port is out of bounds and very harsh. A full refund would be another extreme.

A 10% discount for a future cruise is a joke. The people attacking the passengers is a bit extreme. Can you imagine?

Sure, one engine is broken but still book your cruise, everything is fine. Come aboard, pay in full. Woops! SORRY! Ports cancelled... but enjoy 10% (which is almost sales tax) off a future booking cruise.

THANK YOU!

I find that as amusing as this thread is becoming. I also am realistic in believing the people posting that would not be saying that if they were on that ship.

:)

[Mooder]

This thread is getting ridiculous. As always, the truth and common sense is at neither extreme. To call passengers complainers who booked on a broken ship that were reassured the engines were fine and could get them to port is out of bounds and very harsh. A full refund would be another extreme.

A 10% discount for a future cruise is a joke. The people attacking the passengers is a bit extreme. Can you imagine?

Sure, one engine is broken but still book your cruise, everything is fine. Come aboard, pay in full. Woops! SORRY! Ports cancelled... but enjoy 10% (which is almost sales tax) off a future booking cruise.

THANK YOU!

I find that as amusing as this thread is becoming. I also am realistic in believing the people posting that would not be saying that if they were on that ship.

:)

 

No one ever remembers the reasonable - somewhere in the middle - posts, but they are there. I agree with you that common sense is somewhere between full refund and attacking the passengers. (Did you forget that they received $200 OBC?) Unfortunately, none of the passengers will say what they would find satisfactory. It has been posted many times that people sympathize with them. I have posted so myself. But I don't know what they want so I don't know if I agree with them or not. Overall, I think they received decent compensation. It would not have made me happy to have missed Barbados or any other port, but it would have kept me from attacking NCL.

[jla418]

WOW, from reading all this, one would think that we were wandering aimlessly around the Caribbean completely miserable. Yes, the problem the Dawn encountered on this trip was unexpected, yes we missed ports that we were scheduled to make, yes, we had a fire on board and some cabins on the lower deck were briefly evacuated due to the presence of smoke. Yes the issues were regularly communicated to us, 3 letters in the cabin, as well as daily updates from the captain on the PA system.

 

Yes, the crew did a great job overall in my opinion. Yes, we had very good to great hot food whenever we wanted. Yes, we did visit some very nice alternate ports. Yes, the overall weather was beautiful. Yes, believe it or not, there were many many passengers who accepted the changes and enjoyed the trip by looking at the positives, and not the negatives. Other than one brief incident of booing the cruise director, and I doubt there were 800 passengers in the theater at the time, people were not constantly wandering the ship complaining of the changes.

 

I booked this cruise back in July 2010, was notified of the engine issues that would impact the Dawn sailings from October 22, 2010 thru April 22, 2011 in September 2010. I still chose to go on this cruise, even with ample time to change my plans. To my knowledge, so far, ours was the only cruise that has not made the scheduled ports. Regardless of what the contract says, NCL was thrown a curve ball when there were issues with a second engine, and in my opinion, did what they thought was best to provide a pleasant, enjoyable cruise for those of us on the February, 11, 2010 sailing.

 

For those that claim there was no communication, I (hope I) have attached the letters we received before and during the cruise.

 

Part of the adventure of travel is the unknown and the unexpected. Part of life is the unknown and unexpected. Sometimes you have to enjoy the unexpected and move on.

DawnLtr1.pdf

DawnLtr2.pdf

DawnLtr3.pdf

DawnLtr4.pdf

[oldguysandgalls]

Thank you jla418, for bringing some common sense to this board. Thank you so much for your realistic, fair and balanced post. Thank you.

 

 

WOW, from reading all this, one would think that we were wandering aimlessly around the Caribbean completely miserable. Yes, the problem the Dawn encountered on this trip was unexpected, yes we missed ports that we were scheduled to make, yes, we had a fire on board and some cabins on the lower deck were briefly evacuated due to the presence of smoke. Yes the issues were regularly communicated to us, 3 letters in the cabin, as well as daily updates from the captain on the PA system.

 

Yes, the crew did a great job overall in my opinion. Yes, we had very good to great hot food whenever we wanted. Yes, we did visit some very nice alternate ports. Yes, the overall weather was beautiful. Yes, believe it or not, there were many many passengers who accepted the changes and enjoyed the trip by looking at the positives, and not the negatives. Other than one brief incident of booing the cruise director, and I doubt there were 800 passengers in the theater at the time, people were not constantly wandering the ship complaining of the changes.

 

I booked this cruise back in July 2010, was notified of the engine issues that would impact the Dawn sailings from October 22, 2010 thru April 22, 2011 in September 2010. I still chose to go on this cruise, even with ample time to change my plans. To my knowledge, so far, ours was the only cruise that has not made the scheduled ports. Regardless of what the contract says, NCL was thrown a curve ball when there were issues with a second engine, and in my opinion, did what they thought was best to provide a pleasant, enjoyable cruise for those of us on the February, 11, 2010 sailing.

 

For those that claim there was no communication, I (hope I) have attached the letters we received before and during the cruise.

 

Part of the adventure of travel is the unknown and the unexpected. Part of life is the unknown and unexpected. Sometimes you have to enjoy the unexpected and move on.

[Mooder]

For those that claim there was no communication, I (hope I) have attached the letters we received before and during the cruise.

 

Part of the adventure of travel is the unknown and the unexpected. Part of life is the unknown and unexpected. Sometimes you have to enjoy the unexpected and move on.

 

Thank you. This sheds light. :)

[mycruises002]

After calling the customer relations # for NCL and speaking to rep, was told I must write to NCL and either mail the letter or fax it. I feel like other cruisers that the best value for myself and my husband, was to see 5 different ports we never been to, in 9 days. And we really wanted to see the humpback whales and their babies in Samana. The monkey encounter in Barbados, Scenic Train ride in St. Kitts, etc. I'm worried to express why doing the cruise was best for us BECAUSE, some posters are cruel. They state that we want sympathy. This is not true. We booked this cruise in Jan. 2011 for the Feb. 11, 2011. Because that is the only way we can do this between, Liver Transplant Doctors and Liver bloodwork ups every two weeks, Lymphoma CT/PET Scans every 3 months, Diabetes Doctors visit every 3 months and eye doctor visit at Bascom Palmer for watching spot in eye turning into cancer, too every 4 months. So the cruise is really the only way we personally can give our gift to each other for Valentines day and Vacation the very most we could in 9 days for the most ports we could see and experience the most excursions. So we felt like the whole package was special choices for us. It would have been our best time enjoying something we really wanted, in over two years after overcoming such serious illnesses. Hopefully no one will post mean things about this post. We feel like our plans were ruined due to something NCL knew and hope we get a second chance to squeeze in this 9 day cruise next year and see the ports and whales/babies and monkeys, if serious health issues that we are already aware of doesn't stop us, from ever getting to. Posters please understand that everyone lives, plans, feels and hopes differently. I don't want to offend anyone anytime, if I can help it. We all live day to day, but some live seriously day to day like us.

[Mooder]

After calling the customer relations # for NCL and speaking to rep, was told I must write to NCL and either mail the letter or fax it. I feel like other cruisers that the best value for myself and my husband, was to see 5 different ports we never been to, in 9 days. And we really wanted to see the humpback whales and their babies in Samana. The monkey encounter in Barbados, Scenic Train ride in St. Kitts, etc. I'm worried to express why doing the cruise was best for us BECAUSE, some posters are cruel. They state that we want sympathy. This is not true. We booked this cruise in Jan. 2011 for the Feb. 11, 2011. Because that is the only way we can do this between, Liver Transplant Doctors and Liver bloodwork ups every two weeks, Lymphoma CT/PET Scans every 3 months, Diabetes Doctors visit every 3 months and eye doctor visit at Bascom Palmer for watching spot in eye turning into cancer, too every 4 months. So the cruise is really the only way we personally can give our gift to each other for Valentines day and Vacation the very most we could in 9 days for the most ports we could see and experience the most excursions. So we felt like the whole package was special choices for us. It would have been our best time enjoying something we really wanted, in over two years after overcoming such serious illnesses. Hopefully no one will post mean things about this post. We feel like our plans were ruined due to something NCL knew and hope we get a second chance to squeeze in this 9 day cruise next year and see the ports and whales/babies and monkeys, if serious health issues that we are already aware of doesn't stop us, from ever getting to. Posters please understand that everyone lives, plans, feels and hopes differently. I don't want to offend anyone anytime, if I can help it. We all live day to day, but some live seriously day to day like us.

 

I'm so sorry you and your family were disappointed with all you are going through. I truly am. I also hope that you were able to make the best of a disappointing situation, at least being together in the Caribbean. May I ask what you are hoping to receive from NCL in terms of compensation? I don't ask to be cruel, but because I am trying to understand.

 

I'll be praying that you can see Barbados, Samana, and St. Kitts next year. :)

[Partyatsea]

Can any of the cruisers on this sailing (beside jla418) answer Mooder as to what they think would be fair compensation for this? Just curious what you feel would have been the right offer from NCL.

[Partyatsea]

Can any of the cruisers on this sailing (beside jla418) answer Mooder as to what they think would be fair compensation for this? Just curious what you feel would have been the right offer from NCL.

 

I guess what I'm really wondering is what would have made you say "well we did miss some ports we were really looking forward to, but we did get to go to St. John, St.Thomas, St Martin and Tortola and they gave us _____________, nice job NCL "

[mycruises002]

I'm so sorry you and your family were disappointed with all you are going through. I truly am. I also hope that you were able to make the best of a disappointing situation, at least being together in the Caribbean. May I ask what you are hoping to receive from NCL in terms of compensation? I don't ask to be cruel, but because I am trying to understand.

 

I'll be praying that you can see Barbados, Samana, and St. Kitts next year. :)

 

 

Yes, everyday we wake up together is a wonderful day. We already spend all our time together. We can't drink, party & do things that have extra germs, either. So would hope NCL would as least be 50% responsible in our missing out on our last minute cruises / vacation / excursions, due to NCL knowing of the mechanical issues with their engines, that we paid for in good faith and good health. If NCL does offer 50% off the same cruise next year(hopefully they'll have it then), they have a 50/50 chance we won't be able to make it, depending on hubby's health, then. If his health is bad NCL won't be out one cent. We really hope to cruise / vacation / do the ports / excursions next year that we missed this year. I hope this explains it a little better.

[david_sobe]

This is an interesting review. I am very loyal to NCL but the Dawn should not be sailing. The cruise line put profit before passengers. I know I will take heat from the NCL crowd for saying that. But you can research my profile here. All my NCL cruises were reviewed as positive experiences here on CC so you cant label me as a NCL basher.

 

What engine problems? Come aboard. Dont worry about the engine problems. Pay in full. Ok now you are on board, we are cancelling ports. We can only make it so far. Sorry you wanted and intended to go other places. Have fun. Enjoy your 10% discount. :)

C'mon now NCL ! Your passengers deserve better!

http://www.cruisecritic.com/memberreviews/memberreview.cfm?EntryID=79237

[kerrytens]

WOW, from reading all this, one would think that we were wandering aimlessly around the Caribbean completely miserable. Yes, the problem the Dawn encountered on this trip was unexpected, yes we missed ports that we were scheduled to make, yes, we had a fire on board and some cabins on the lower deck were briefly evacuated due to the presence of smoke. Yes the issues were regularly communicated to us, 3 letters in the cabin, as well as daily updates from the captain on the PA system.

 

Yes, the crew did a great job overall in my opinion. Yes, we had very good to great hot food whenever we wanted. Yes, we did visit some very nice alternate ports. Yes, the overall weather was beautiful. Yes, believe it or not, there were many many passengers who accepted the changes and enjoyed the trip by looking at the positives, and not the negatives. Other than one brief incident of booing the cruise director, and I doubt there were 800 passengers in the theater at the time, people were not constantly wandering the ship complaining of the changes.

 

I booked this cruise back in July 2010, was notified of the engine issues that would impact the Dawn sailings from October 22, 2010 thru April 22, 2011 in September 2010. I still chose to go on this cruise, even with ample time to change my plans. To my knowledge, so far, ours was the only cruise that has not made the scheduled ports. Regardless of what the contract says, NCL was thrown a curve ball when there were issues with a second engine, and in my opinion, did what they thought was best to provide a pleasant, enjoyable cruise for those of us on the February, 11, 2010 sailing.

 

For those that claim there was no communication, I (hope I) have attached the letters we received before and during the cruise.

 

Part of the adventure of travel is the unknown and the unexpected. Part of life is the unknown and unexpected. Sometimes you have to enjoy the unexpected and move on.

Thanks for clarifying a lot for me. I find it very interesting that you mention that people were made aware of the engine issues direct from NCL. With that being the case, how in the world can those angry pax have any sort of case? It seems to me that they were given an 'out' yet they chose to continue with their plans. I don't see anything being hidden.

 

Sorry, the compensation received seems more than generous with this news. I will add that I would have been over the moon happy with this package had it been offered on my fateful Carnival Destiny cruise last January:rolleyes: Heck, I probably would have had another cruise booked with them too ... says a lot since I'm booked with NCL instead!

[swedish weave]

This is an interesting review. I am very loyal to NCL but the Dawn should not be sailing. The cruise line put profit before passengers. I know I will take heat from the NCL crowd for saying that. But you can research my profile here. All my NCL cruises were reviewed as positive experiences here on CC so you cant label me as a NCL basher.

 

What engine problems? Come aboard. Dont worry about the engine problems. Pay in full. Ok now you are on board, we are cancelling ports. We can only make it so far. Sorry you wanted and intended to go other places. Have fun. Enjoy your 10% discount. :)

C'mon now NCL ! Your passengers deserve better!

http://www.cruisecritic.com/memberreviews/memberreview.cfm?EntryID=79237

 

Why should the Dawn not be sailing ? You have made the same statement several times without clarification. It is defititely not a safety issue, and mechanical problems can occur on any vehicle or ship at any time.

 

The previous posts have dispelled the rants that nobody was notified and NCL concealed the problems. Since that issue proved to be false accusations against NCL, what else is there ?

 

Are you aware that the Dawn arrived Georgetown on time and now on her way to Cozumel on time as of the last check I made.

[oldguysandgalls]

Dear mycruises002,

 

We want you to know how much your post has touched us. Our thoughts are with you. We can feel your disappointment and you reminded us of how blessed we are with our health. We want to thank you for that.

 

We also believe under the circumstanses, NCL may wish re-consider and take a closer look at your personal situation. Perhaps a letter from your doctor(s) to NCL may help you in giving you the cruise which you so richly deserve. Please don't give up.

 

Sincerely,

oldguysandgalls

 

PS.

On another note: We also like to take this opportunity and apologise to the entire board for some of our flippant comments earlier on. Unfortunately our enthusiasm for cruising has inadvertently offended others with our posts and for which we sincerely apologise.

 

Sincerely,

oldguysandgalls

 

 

After calling the customer relations # for NCL and speaking to rep, was told I must write to NCL and either mail the letter or fax it. I feel like other cruisers that the best value for myself and my husband, was to see 5 different ports we never been to, in 9 days. And we really wanted to see the humpback whales and their babies in Samana. The monkey encounter in Barbados, Scenic Train ride in St. Kitts, etc. I'm worried to express why doing the cruise was best for us BECAUSE, some posters are cruel. They state that we want sympathy. This is not true. We booked this cruise in Jan. 2011 for the Feb. 11, 2011. Because that is the only way we can do this between, Liver Transplant Doctors and Liver bloodwork ups every two weeks, Lymphoma CT/PET Scans every 3 months, Diabetes Doctors visit every 3 months and eye doctor visit at Bascom Palmer for watching spot in eye turning into cancer, too every 4 months. So the cruise is really the only way we personally can give our gift to each other for Valentines day and Vacation the very most we could in 9 days for the most ports we could see and experience the most excursions. So we felt like the whole package was special choices for us. It would have been our best time enjoying something we really wanted, in over two years after overcoming such serious illnesses. Hopefully no one will post mean things about this post. We feel like our plans were ruined due to something NCL knew and hope we get a second chance to squeeze in this 9 day cruise next year and see the ports and whales/babies and monkeys, if serious health issues that we are already aware of doesn't stop us, from ever getting to. Posters please understand that everyone lives, plans, feels and hopes differently. I don't want to offend anyone anytime, if I can help it. We all live day to day, but some live seriously day to day like us.

[fin]

I just found CC a few months ago when I was deciding on my upcoming cruise. I successfully cruised four times without it, although I will never do so again because it is an extraordinary resource.

 

Re: not coming to CC until after a bad cruise experience, two comments: first, a lot of people lurk here without posting, or only post after some time-- in my case, I lurked for several months before I created an account and started posting. So a first-time poster is not necessarily new to CC. And second, a lot of people hear about CC while they are on a cruise, and come here after to see what it's about and post comments, both good and bad.

 

Should be a sticky!