Ashes to Ashes

[davenew]

Just a guess, but I'm thinking the OP is disappointed that the ban on balcony smoking has caused an increase in casino smoking.

And, of course, RCCI wouldnt ban smoking in casinos, its too much of a revenue earner :D

[David1951]

And, of course, RCCI wouldnt ban smoking in casinos, its too much of a revenue earner :D

 

 

Don't sail out of Australia then because smoking ISNT allowed inside any part of the ship,other then starboard (I think) side of the pool deck and boat deck

[LetsGetWet!]

I'm inclined to think that drinkers tend to smoke and gamble more ;)

Some are inclined to think the moon is made of green cheese, but that doesn't make it true. ;)

 

Surveys out of Vegas & Atlantic City that I've seen seem to indicate that old wive's tale simply isn't true.

[Ocean Boy]

I think we had them in March. I know for a fact we did previously, but on Allure since the casino is divided it's a moot point. I'm curious to see this Nov on GR, but honestly who wants their formal clothes to stink?

 

I don't want any of my clothes to stink. I'm not to fond of hair that reaks of smoke either.

[LetsGetWet!]

And, of course, RCCI wouldnt ban smoking in casinos, its too much of a revenue earner :D

Actually, that's exactly why I believe they WILL eventually ban it, as sister-line Celebrity has already done. Revenue tends to go DOWN, not up, if smoky conditions drive away over 80% of your potential customers.

[Ocean Boy]

Or, you could just refrain from opening a thread that doesn't interest you.

 

It doesn't work that way on CC. There are posters who when they don't like a thread feel the need to have it moved, locked, or deleted. They don't feel that we are all capable of making our own decisions on what to read, or not.

[dixieva]

Some are inclined to think the moon is made of green cheese, but that doesn't make it true. ;)

 

Surveys out of Vegas & Atlantic City that I've seen seem to indicate that old wive's tale simply isn't true.

 

 

You are right- this is not true anymore. Maybe ten or 15 years ago but not now.

 

Most casinos that we frequent on land do not allow smoking inside the building and it has worked out fine. They are still in business and one banned smoking inside years ago.

[sagsgirl]

We were recently an 11 day cruise to Alaska on the Star Princess. There were two days when the casino was made non smoking. There was also one bar designated for smoking. It was enclosed with doors on each side. This allowed the smokers to smoke without the smoke floating throughout the ship. Very nice for all.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[matj2000]

I don't believe there is any factual evidence to that effect.

 

 

You don't need facts, just go there and look around.

Many are smoking & drinking$$$$.

 

They are usually the more fun ones also...

Edited September 4, 2014 by matj2000

[Evilgrin72]

I think the cruise lines are missing an opportunity to keep just about everyone happy by treating eCigs the same as regular cigarettes. They can't ban smoking 100% because no smoker is going to go through nicotine withdrawal on vacation, so to COMPLETELY eradicate smoking would also eradicate 20% of their customer base instantly. However, providing any smoking areas whatsoever is going to cause certain small portions of the ship to become smoky (the fewer areas there are, the smokier those areas will be.) So, the non-smokers who won't be happy unless they can camp out in any and all areas of the ship without being subjected to second-hand smoke can never be 100% sated.

 

If you allow the eCigs, that 20% of your customer base you stand to lose now has an alternative to smoking on board. The non-smokers will smell virtually nothing, their clothes won't stink. Unintended benefits could include getting more people off cigarettes permanently as well as reducing the risk of fires due to lit cigarettes/lighters on board. It's a compromise that could allow both factions to peacefully coexist onboard, and it's being ignored. It's much easier to just lump it all in together as "tobacco products" and move on while a potential solution is staring you in the face.

[Starry Eyes]

I am not sure that the effect of vaping on indoor air quality has been settled. With so many different cartridges, it may not be so easy to settle that issue.

 

Still, as a nonsmoker, I'd rather be in a casino with many people vaping than with many people smoking.

[orville99]

I think the cruise lines are missing an opportunity to keep just about everyone happy by treating eCigs the same as regular cigarettes. They can't ban smoking 100% because no smoker is going to go through nicotine withdrawal on vacation, so to COMPLETELY eradicate smoking would also eradicate 20% of their customer base instantly. However, providing any smoking areas whatsoever is going to cause certain small portions of the ship to become smoky (the fewer areas there are, the smokier those areas will be.) So, the non-smokers who won't be happy unless they can camp out in any and all areas of the ship without being subjected to second-hand smoke can never be 100% sated.

 

If you allow the eCigs, that 20% of your customer base you stand to lose now has an alternative to smoking on board. The non-smokers will smell virtually nothing, their clothes won't stink. Unintended benefits could include getting more people off cigarettes permanently as well as reducing the risk of fires due to lit cigarettes/lighters on board. It's a compromise that could allow both factions to peacefully coexist onboard, and it's being ignored. It's much easier to just lump it all in together as "tobacco products" and move on while a potential solution is staring you in the face.

 

Absolutely agree. The problem is that the cruise lines don't know how to handle the knee-jerk reactions from non/anti smokers when they see the vapor. Hopefully, now that the FDA has commissioned serious research studies, the air will eventually be cleared on this issue.

 

I am not sure that the effect of vaping on indoor air quality has been settled. With so many different cartridges, it may not be so easy to settle that issue.

 

Still, as a nonsmoker, I'd rather be in a casino with many people vaping than with many people smoking.

 

Early studies (which are what the FDA originally pointed to as its argument why they wouldn't approve PV's as NRT devices) indicated that there was no detectable nicotine or other contaminants in the exhaled vapor. Their presumption was since there was nothing coming out, there was no way to prove that there was anything going in.

[Evilgrin72]

I am not sure that the effect of vaping on indoor air quality has been settled. With so many different cartridges, it may not be so easy to settle that issue.

 

Still, as a nonsmoker, I'd rather be in a casino with many people vaping than with many people smoking.

 

It'll never be "settled." One side will present one study showing it's harmless and the other side will show empirical evidence that it caused cancer in lab rats and it will be a never-ending stalemate. We've already been down that road.

 

What it would do is what I mentioned earlier, serve as a compromise that I believe both sides could live with once deployed in practice. People worried that smokers would use the proliferation of eCig use as subterfuge to smoke actual tobacco undetected would quickly find that there is a radical difference. Someone smoking an actual cigarette might as well wear a neon sign, the odor would be so stark and obvious. Anyone worried about allowing eCigs to be used in cabins, on balconies, in the theater, etc.. should probably know that it's already happening in abundance, so this would have little to no effect on the devices' current usage.

Edited September 4, 2014 by Evilgrin72

[terrygbennett]

I wanted there to be some confusion on my post. My point (probably a little complex for some) is the smoking debate transcends into many issues. Of course, I knew I would get the typical responses – I worked here for almost 15 years and deleted 1000’s of posts (or actually moved them!) Don’t you just love the attacks based on my number of posts!?! Or the people that don’t get it and make a sophomoric response just to see their post count go up? 

 

Why have a no smoking policy that allows smoking inside the ship while banning it on balconies? There is the conundrum! The smoking experiment has been tried –who sailed on the Paradise (Carnival)? Does anyone remember why it stopped being a smoke free ship?

 

And if 21% of people still smoke in the US – the odds are the number is higher for couples to have at least one smoker. Therefore, the cruise lines are restricting the pool of possible customers (one family member smokes – so to make everyone happy they pick another vacation). Someone choosing to cruise and someone being banned because of their habit is another thing.

 

Now, throw in the whole ecig debate (wait what about snuff, chewing tobacco, etc.) and this has become an extremely complex issue. If you ban cigarette smokers, what’s next?

[Starry Eyes]

It'll never be "settled." One side will present one study showing it's harmless and the other side will show empirical evidence that it caused cancer in lab rats and it will be a never-ending stalemate. We've already been down that road....

 

 

Down that road? Have the e-cig makers even started broad testing? If the e-cig makers want their product to be widely accepted by nonsmokers, then they need to do the studies. Yes, it will take time and money, but it is on them to show their product is safe for the rest of us. If those manufacturers won't complete the testing, the products won't be accepted by nonsmokers (aka, the majority of the populace) for use inside public spaces. In absence of data to prove safety, call goes to nonsmokers health...little or no public indoor use like reg cigs. Stalemate...call still goes to nonsmokers health...ittle or no public indoor use like reg cigs. Time for these companies to step up and do the hard work.

 

Forget compromise....go for real solid data. Nonsmokers, by and large, will not compromise on their health or their kids health. Want to vap indoors...get the companies to prove it safe. Until then, like it or not, e-cigs go to the smoking section.

[LetsGetWet!]

You don't need facts

Thanks for clarifying, although I guess that is pretty obvious for much of what you post... :rolleyes:

[Big_G]

Actually, that's exactly why I believe they WILL eventually ban it, as sister-line Celebrity has already done. Revenue tends to go DOWN, not up, if smoky conditions drive away over 80% of your potential customers.

 

You don't need facts, just go there and look around.

 

Many are smoking & drinking$$$$.

 

They are usually the more fun ones also...

 

On our last couple of Celebrity cruises, the casinos were rocking pretty good almost every night. I think Royal will eventually follow suit. They just need the dust to settle from the previous policy change...or should I say the smoke to clear? :D

[orville99]

"I wanted there to be some confusion on my post. My point (probably a little complex for some) is the smoking debate transcends into many issues. Of course, I knew I would get the typical responses – I worked here for almost 15 years and deleted 1000’s of posts (or actually moved them!) Don’t you just love the attacks based on my number of posts!?! Or the people that don’t get it and make a sophomoric response just to see their post count go up? 

 

Why have a no smoking policy that allows smoking inside the ship while banning it on balconies? There is the conundrum! The smoking experiment has been tried –who sailed on the Paradise (Carnival)? Does anyone remember why it stopped being a smoke free ship?

 

And if 21% of people still smoke in the US – the odds are the number is higher for couples to have at least one smoker. Therefore, the cruise lines are restricting the pool of possible customers (one family member smokes – so to make everyone happy they pick another vacation). Someone choosing to cruise and someone being banned because of their habit is another thing.

 

Now, throw in the whole ecig debate (wait what about snuff, chewing tobacco, etc.) and this has become an extremely complex issue. If you ban cigarette smokers, what’s next?"

 

So there really was no purpose to start this thread other than to see how many feathers you could ruffle?:confused:

Edited September 4, 2014 by orville99

[Starry Eyes]

 

Why have a no smoking policy that allows smoking inside the ship while banning it on balconies? There is the conundrum! The smoking experiment has been tried –who sailed on the Paradise (Carnival)? Does anyone remember why it stopped being a smoke free ship?

 

The trouble with balcony smoking is that the same passenger is next door to the heavy smokers for the entire cruise. If the nonsmoker is sensitive to smoke, that passenger does not feel they got value from their balcony. Both smoker and nonsmoker paid for balcony cabins; if one used it a great deal, the other did not. If balcony smoking is prohibited, the nonsmoker gets full use of the balcony while the smoker feels the value of the balcony is diminished (though they can go to other outdoor smoking areas). For years, the balance went toward the smoker, with smoking allowed on balconies. With declining rates of smoking the cruise lines, by and large, have started tilting that balance toward their nonsmoking passengers. Either way, somebody will not be pleased because they are balcony neighbors for the entire cruise, not just for some random hours here or there.

 

I was new to cruising when Paradise experiment ended. It was over a decade ago, and many views on smoking have evolved since then. Wasn't it a rather ordinary Carnival ship doing the same old itinerary over and over again? That may have also impacted the revenue issues. I am not sure that means other smoking restrictions must fail.

[Evilgrin72]

Down that road? Have the e-cig makers even started broad testing? If the e-cig makers want their product to be widely accepted by nonsmokers, then they need to do the studies. Yes, it will take time and money, but it is on them to show their product is safe for the rest of us. If those manufacturers won't complete the testing, the products won't be accepted by nonsmokers (aka, the majority of the populace) for use inside public spaces. In absence of data to prove safety, call goes to nonsmokers health...little or no public indoor use like reg cigs. Stalemate...call still goes to nonsmokers health...ittle or no public indoor use like reg cigs. Time for these companies to step up and do the hard work.

 

Forget compromise....go for real solid data. Nonsmokers, by and large, will not compromise on their health or their kids health. Want to vap indoors...get the companies to prove it safe. Until then, like it or not, e-cigs go to the smoking section.

 

 

In theory I agree, but in reality, both sides of the equation will invariably produce "solid data" that supports whatever their argument is. We saw this for years with second-hand cigarette smoke. Different studies will produce different results and in a topic such as this, people will undoubtedly cite whatever sources back up their viewpoint. Anything released by the eCig manufacturers showing it's safe will instantly be dismissed by the public as self-serving, skewed data meant to help increase sales.

 

Most people are not open-minded. It's much more difficult to find someone willing to listen to both sides of a discussion and manufacture a judgment based solely on what they hear than to find someone with personal biases that will seek out whatever tidbits of information cement their already-held beliefs. This is just human nature. It's the source of essentially all conflicts, the resolution of which comprises the bulk of my professional life. Through experience, I've found that implementing outside-the-box compromises, even if both sides are opposed initially (this is usually the best indication that the proposal is fair) is by far the most effective long-term solution. Until someone applies this line of thinking to the situation and forces the battle lines to be blurred, people will continue to line up on one side or the other. People like to belong to a larger whole. It's the biggest reason we still have the archaic and foolish two-party system of government which should have changed generations ago.

 

In the meantime, like it or not, e-cigs go to the smoking section per Royal Caribbean. In reality, they are used in the cabins, on the balconies, in the bathrooms, in public spaces, etc. etc. It's remarkably easy to vape undetected if one is so inclined and as long as people are able to get away with bending the rules, they will do so. That's human nature as well. Permitting eCigs isn't going to pose any additional "risk" that doesn't already exist without your knowledge.

[trev71]

I dont smoke and I dont really want to smell smoke when I am out on my Balcony not once have i ever smelled smoke for the record, from smokes stacks or cigeragttes except the one time the guy above me smoked.

 

I just find it odd a non smoker would cancel their cruise because of this. I dont think its the casino related either as they have half smoking and half non and my last cruise I couldnt smell it too bad in the non smoking section.

[BND]

"I wanted there to be some confusion on my post. My point (probably a little complex for some) is the smoking debate transcends into many issues. Of course, I knew I would get the typical responses – I worked here for almost 15 years and deleted 1000’s of posts (or actually moved them!) Don’t you just love the attacks based on my number of posts!?! Or the people that don’t get it and make a sophomoric response just to see their post count go up? 

 

Why have a no smoking policy that allows smoking inside the ship while banning it on balconies? There is the conundrum! The smoking experiment has been tried –who sailed on the Paradise (Carnival)? Does anyone remember why it stopped being a smoke free ship?

 

And if 21% of people still smoke in the US – the odds are the number is higher for couples to have at least one smoker. Therefore, the cruise lines are restricting the pool of possible customers (one family member smokes – so to make everyone happy they pick another vacation). Someone choosing to cruise and someone being banned because of their habit is another thing.

 

Now, throw in the whole ecig debate (wait what about snuff, chewing tobacco, etc.) and this has become an extremely complex issue. If you ban cigarette smokers, what’s next?"

 

So there really was no purpose to start this thread other than to see how many feathers you could ruffle?:confused:

 

21% seems very high. I know almost no one anymore that smokes except for maybe 2 family members that don't really vacation because they can't afford to.

 

The reality is, the higher someone's education level, the less likely it is that they smoke. The higher the education, normally the higher the income which means more disposable income to travel. I would guess that the percentage of smokers onboard rarely, if ever is 21%. My guess is more like 10% and as that group ages (which they are) the percentages will drop as less people smoke now than did even 20 years ago. The 21% is skewed by the numbers in some income levels and where they live. I work in a building with very educated people (mostly engineers) and I would say the percentage that smoke in this building is less than 10% and almost all of those are support people(facilities in particular) and some enlisted military. None of the professionals I work with smoke and they ALL travel and vacation a lot. You can't use the 21% number and think that applies to cruises, just because it applies to the overall population.

 

As for e-cigs we dont' know enough. A report just came out in the last week that they contain toxic elements and that there are indications that they are a gateway to harder drugs and addiction so hardly as harmless as some want everyone to believe. I think they're just an excuse to keep smoking without actually lighting a cigarette up and to attract young people to an implied "safer" way to smoke.

 

And if someone wants to chew, I don't care as long as they don't spit around me. That really is the only impact of chewing on anyone else besides the person who does it.

Edited September 4, 2014 by BND

[LetsGetWet!]

I wanted there to be some confusion on my post.

Well then, mission accomplished!

Don’t you just love... the people that don’t get it and make a sophomoric response...

Gotta love it! OP admits their opening post was purposefully confusing, but then calls those who were confused (didn't get it) "sophomoric." :rolleyes:

[Starry Eyes]

In theory I agree, but in reality, both sides of the equation will invariably produce "solid data" that supports whatever their argument is. We saw this for years with second-hand cigarette smoke. Different studies will produce different results and in a topic such as this, people will undoubtedly cite whatever sources back up their viewpoint. Anything released by the eCig manufacturers showing it's safe will instantly be dismissed by the public as self-serving, skewed data meant to help increase sales.

 

Most people are not open-minded. It's much more difficult to find someone willing to listen to both sides of a discussion and manufacture a judgment based solely on what they hear than to find someone with personal biases that will seek out whatever tidbits of information cement their already-held beliefs. This is just human nature. It's the source of essentially all conflicts, the resolution of which comprises the bulk of my professional life. Through experience, I've found that implementing outside-the-box compromises, even if both sides are opposed initially (this is usually the best indication that the proposal is fair) is by far the most effective long-term solution. Until someone applies this line of thinking to the situation and forces the battle lines to be blurred, people will continue to line up on one side or the other. People like to belong to a larger whole. It's the biggest reason we still have the archaic and foolish two-party system of government which should have changed generations ago.

 

In the meantime, like it or not, e-cigs go to the smoking section per Royal Caribbean. In reality, they are used in the cabins, on the balconies, in the bathrooms, in public spaces, etc. etc. It's remarkably easy to vape undetected if one is so inclined and as long as people are able to get away with bending the rules, they will do so. That's human nature as well. Permitting eCigs isn't going to pose any additional "risk" that doesn't already exist without your knowledge.

You believe manufacturer's data will be disregarded. Maybe. Still, if they want their product to be accepted indoors in public spaces, they must produce solid safety data. Sorry no excuses...that is their job, period, if they want their product in those spaces. The rest of the argument goes out the window if they won't do their part.

 

In the mean time, e-cigs go to the smoking section per RCI rules. And per rules of many other entities.

 

I imagine people do vape on their balconies. If I cannot detect it and it is outdoors, it does not ruffle my feathers, though maybe somebody else will be upset. If somebody vapes undetected inside their non-smoking hotel room or stateroom, well, yes, they are getting away with breaking rules undetected. Of course, for that time, it is their private space. I can air it out if it is my private space thereafter. In my case, it is likely I'll want to air it out because of perfume vs vaping odors, but that is my greater sensitivity.

[Starry Eyes]

...

And if 21% of people still smoke in the US – the odds are the number is higher for couples to have at least one smoker. Therefore, the cruise lines are restricting the pool of possible customers (one family member smokes – so to make everyone happy they pick another vacation). Someone choosing to cruise and someone being banned because of their habit is another thing.

...

 

I

...

I just find it odd a non smoker would cancel their cruise because of this. I dont think its the casino related either as they have half smoking and half non and my last cruise I couldnt smell it too bad in the non smoking section.

OP self identified as a nonsmoker, but did not say if all in party are nonsmokers. The OP even discusses what might happen if one half of a couple smokes.