Ashes to Ashes

[Evilgrin72]

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.

 

I agree with you. The manufacturers should conduct their own studies and release their own data. I just fear that it will either be slanted or will be perceived as such, as will evidence provided to the contrary by groups that have a vested interest in keeping their usage and proliferation suppressed. That's just the nature of the beast, almost everyone is out for him or herself, and even those who are truly impartial are rarely received that way.

 

I would simply be interested in seeing how the potential compromise would work in practice. I suspect it would work better than almost anyone imagines, but I am under no naive illusions that it will ever happen, let alone anytime soon. There's still a vocal fraction of non-smokers who would feel like they "lost the battle" if eCig use were allowed everywhere. Such is the mentality of many on both sides of the issue.

 

In fact, on a different website/board, I posted a poll to this effect, asking non-smokers if smoking were to be made completely illegal, but e-cig use were permitted everywhere, how would they feel about it? Many said they'd be all for eCig use as long as actual cigs were eradicated permanently, but roughly 17% admitted straight out that even if they couldn't smell anything and were convinced that there was no health hazard, they would still be opposed to it simply because they would be resentful that smokers found a loophole/end-around. Such is the us vs. them attitude that exists in both camps, and this is what often prevents compromise from arising within the factions. Also why a neutral mediator is often needed to resolve such debates, and that's the function my proposed regulation change would serve. Regrettably, in all probability, it will just remain theoretical.

[pspercy]

. . . . . If you ban cigarette smokers, what’s next?

 

Clean air:D

[NMG318]

....My point (probably a little complex for some....

 

I think it was a little to complex for everyone...hmmm.

 

I am a non (cigarette) smoker but do have an every-other-month cigar. I don't understand why cruise lines can't provide a dedicated smoking lounge for cigarette smokers. I suppose "space is money" to the cruise lines and setting aside a dedicated area to smokers may cut into profits. Some ships do have the cigar lounges set aside that I guess are paid for by the profits of cigar and alcohol sales in the lounge.

 

By the way, (for me) the quickest way to kill a good cigar smoke is to have a cigarette smoker in the same area....yuk!

Edited September 4, 2014 by NMG318

[Ocean Boy]

 

The reality is, the higher someone's education level, the less likely it is that they smoke.

 

That's odd, I read that line in your post and the first thing that popped into my head was the president of the United States.:eek:

[Ocean Boy]

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?

I think that paragraph speaks volumes. And to think you were in a position to be sitting in judgement of what the rest of us wrote around here.

Edited September 4, 2014 by Ocean Boy

[Sitzmark]

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?

 

Because it was ahead of its time. It seems that every line is reducing or eliminating the smoking, and that is a good thing.

 

I'm not sure about your stats about 21 % of the population smoking, I looked up on the CDC website to see what it was. In 2003 it was 21.6, by 2010 it dropped to 19.3%, by 2012 it dropped to 18.1%

 

One interesting stat is that 19.5% of adults age 45-64 are smokers, but only 8.9% of adults smoke beyond 65, you read whatever conclusion you like into that.

 

If we bring income into the picture, only 17% of adults living at or above the poverty level smoke. The Cruise line is less interested in marketing to people that cannot afford a cruise I would guess.

 

I got these numbers from the CDC website, I do not know how they arrive at them but they are generally considered to be accurate.

 

I am not aware of any cigarette smokers that were banned, only the smoking of their cigarettes in certain places. It's my understanding that as long as they comply with the rules they are quite welcome to board the ships. They would probably find their cruise and their life in general more pleasant if they simply quit smoking altogether though.

 

As a former smoker who decided to quit, and then did, I can tell you with out reservation that it is easy, you just stop.

[Sitzmark]

That's odd, I read that line in your post and the first thing that popped into my head was the president of the United States.:eek:

 

 

By Education

 

 

 

• 24.7% of adults with 12 or less years of education (no diploma)
  
• 41.9% of adults with a GED diploma
  
• 23.1% of adults with a high school diploma
  
• 9.1% of adults with an undergraduate college degree
  
• 5.9% of adults with a postgraduate college degree
  

[Starry Eyes]

That's odd, I read that line in your post and the first thing that popped into my head was the president of the United States.:eek:

I thought he quit; not that I can know if or when he backslides. Probably you know others with postgrad degrees who smoke who could provide a replacement for that mental image.

[biomedbob]

Smoking is the reason we now prefer Celebrity over RCCL. Being able to spend some time in the casino without having to change to get rid of the stink.

 

For what its worth....people in our part of the world chew. Even girls, especially those involved in baseball. Learned early on that the reason firefighters wear their boots when they are in the Fire Hall that they can dodge the constant spray from their other members.

Edited September 4, 2014 by biomedbob
syntax

[CRUZBUDS]

By Education

 

 

 

• 24.7% of adults with 12 or less years of education (no diploma)
  
• 41.9% of adults with a GED diploma
  
• 23.1% of adults with a high school diploma
  
• 9.1% of adults with an undergraduate college degree
  
• 5.9% of adults with a postgraduate college degree
  

'

 

a lot of smokers hate these facts :)

 

Someone will soon post about how many advanced degrees that have and they smoke, like it somehow negates the facts.:rolleyes:

 

Carnival stated the percentage their passengers who are smokers is just over 10%. The groups above with the highest percentage of smokers are also like to have less disposable income to cruise with.

[Artemis]

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?

 

 

OP, you may think your confusing posts are clever, but other than using the confusion you created to demean fellow CC community members, all you did was start another tired smoking thread.

 

What is your point? By saying "the smoking debate transcends into many issues" and then offering teasers about the increase in smoking in approved smoking areas, the economic impact of smoking restrictions, ecig use and "what's next to be banned?," you are all over the map and hence contributing nothing but another tired smoking thread. If you played the same game with Royal as you did here, it's no surprise you received a canned reply.

 

Further, whatever point you think you cleverly made, your supporting evidence is lacking. Your former status with CC doesn't make your opinions inherently unique, credible or valuable.

 

Speaking of which, as you've made sure to swagger your CC credentials while skewering other posters, why wouldn't you as a Mod have deemed this a Nuisance Posting?

 

I received a Guideline Reminder for a "Nuisance Posting." Just what is that anyway?

A nuisance post is a message that is either obnoxious, annoying, or offensive to individuals or to the community. These types of posts add nothing to the discussion, and have a tendency to drive the discussion in a different direction.

 

IMO, considering the thread as a whole, the first paragraph of your above-quoted post is obnoxious, annoying and offensive to other posters to this thread and the community, adds nothing to the discussion and has the tendency to drive the discussion in a different direction (to-wit, my and other complaints about your disrespectful approach)

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Cruise Critic Forums mobile app

[Starry Eyes]

By Education

 

 

 

• 24.7% of adults with 12 or less years of education (no diploma)
  
• 41.9% of adults with a GED diploma
  
• 23.1% of adults with a high school diploma
  
• 9.1% of adults with an undergraduate college degree
  
• 5.9% of adults with a postgraduate college degree
  

 

'

 

a lot of smokers hate these facts :)

 

Someone will soon post about how many advanced degrees that have and they smoke, like it somehow negates the facts.:rolleyes:

 

Carnival stated the percentage their passengers who are smokers is just over 10%. The groups above with the highest percentage of smokers are also like to have less disposable income to cruise with.

That a percentage of people with Masters, PhD, MD, JD, etc smoke is unsurprising. New to me was how many GED holders smoke.

[mark290]

That's odd, I read that line in your post and the first thing that popped into my head was the president of the United States.:eek:

 

The odds of me hitting a big jackpot on the slots in a ship's casino are way against me. Oh wait, last time I was in the casino I saw somebody hit it big. That must mean it is not a longshot after all.

[Merion_Mom]

OP, you may think your confusing posts are clever, but other than using the confusion you created to demean fellow CC community members, all you did was start another tired smoking thread.

 

What is your point? By saying "the smoking debate transcends into many issues" and then offering teasers about the increase in smoking in approved smoking areas, the economic impact of smoking restrictions, ecig use and "what's next to be banned?," you are all over the map and hence contributing nothing but another tired smoking thread. If you played the same game with Royal as you did here, it's no surprise you received a canned reply.

 

Further, whatever point you think you cleverly made, your supporting evidence is lacking. Your former status with CC doesn't make your opinions inherently unique, credible or valuable.

 

Speaking of which, as you've made sure to swagger your CC credentials while skewering other posters, why wouldn't you as a Mod have deemed this a Nuisance Posting?

 

I received a Guideline Reminder for a "Nuisance Posting." Just what is that anyway?

A nuisance post is a message that is either obnoxious, annoying, or offensive to individuals or to the community. These types of posts add nothing to the discussion, and have a tendency to drive the discussion in a different direction.

 

IMO, considering the thread as a whole, the first paragraph of your above-quoted post is obnoxious, annoying and offensive to other posters to this thread and the community, adds nothing to the discussion and has the tendency to drive the discussion in a different direction (to-wit, my and other complaints about your disrespectful approach)

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Cruise Critic Forums mobile app

 

I have always loved your screen name. Now I love your post.

 

:)

[Ocean Boy]

The odds of me hitting a big jackpot on the slots in a ship's casino are way against me. Oh wait, last time I was in the casino I saw somebody hit it big. That must mean it is not a longshot after all.

 

I just made an aside comment. I wasn't using it to dispute the fact that people with higher degrees tend not to smoke. I actually can't think of one person on our medical staff that smokes.

[Finbar127]

By the way, (for me) the quickest way to kill a good cigar smoke is to have a cigarette smoker in the same area....yuk!

 

I'm with you. I love the cigar lounge but rarely use it due to the cigarette smokers. However the nice thing about the new smoking policy is although I lost the use of my balcony for cigar smoking I gained the use of the smoking side of the promenade. This past cruise I found a nice spot on the promenade and sat near the railing with my feet sticking out over the ocean, a RCCL cooler bag filled with beer, and a nice sun grown Fuente to enjoy. Acceptable trade IMHO.

[BND]

I'm with you. I love the cigar lounge but rarely use it due to the cigarette smokers. However the nice thing about the new smoking policy is although I lost the use of my balcony for cigar smoking I gained the use of the smoking side of the promenade. This past cruise I found a nice spot on the promenade and sat near the railing with my feet sticking out over the ocean, a RCCL cooler bag filled with beer, and a nice sun grown Fuente to enjoy. Acceptable trade IMHO.

 

I thought cigar smoking was never allowed on balconies.

[Finbar127]

I thought cigar smoking was never allowed on balconies.

 

It was although many would argue that it wasn't. In any case the point is moot since all smoking is now banned on the balconies.

[BND]

It was although many would argue that it wasn't. In any case the point is moot since all smoking is now banned on the balconies.

 

I'm pretty sure cigar smoking was not allowed on balconies but it is a moot point now, fortunately.

[awhcruiser]

This..........

OP, you may think your confusing posts are clever, but other than using the confusion you created to demean fellow CC community members, all you did was start another tired smoking thread.

 

What is your point? By saying "the smoking debate transcends into many issues" and then offering teasers about the increase in smoking in approved smoking areas, the economic impact of smoking restrictions, ecig use and "what's next to be banned?," you are all over the map and hence contributing nothing but another tired smoking thread. If you played the same game with Royal as you did here, it's no surprise you received a canned reply.

 

Further, whatever point you think you cleverly made, your supporting evidence is lacking. Your former status with CC doesn't make your opinions inherently unique, credible or valuable.

 

Speaking of which, as you've made sure to swagger your CC credentials while skewering other posters, why wouldn't you as a Mod have deemed this a Nuisance Posting?

 

I received a Guideline Reminder for a "Nuisance Posting." Just what is that anyway?

A nuisance post is a message that is either obnoxious, annoying, or offensive to individuals or to the community. These types of posts add nothing to the discussion, and have a tendency to drive the discussion in a different direction.

 

IMO, considering the thread as a whole, the first paragraph of your above-quoted post is obnoxious, annoying and offensive to other posters to this thread and the community, adds nothing to the discussion and has the tendency to drive the discussion in a different direction (to-wit, my and other complaints about your disrespectful approach)

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Cruise Critic Forums mobile app

[Thetrail]

Wrong.

Just to back you up here, you are correct....K.O...:)

[Thetrail]

I'm pretty sure cigar smoking was not allowed on balconies but it is a moot point now, fortunately.

Cigar smoking used to be allowed on your balcony as was cigarettes....:D

[grab007]

That a percentage of people with Masters, PhD, MD, JD, etc smoke is unsurprising. New to me was how many GED holders smoke.

 

Statistics/polls can never be completely believed. The statisticians are hired by people with an agenda and often formulate questions to come to a desired outcome. Often they arbitrarily just leave out data. For example:

 

Do you really believe the unemployment rate is 6.1%? They don't count people who have "dropped out" of the workforce. Why?

 

My advice: be very wary when anyone quotes statistics/polls.

 

"There are three types of lies: Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics!"

[BND]

Cigar smoking used to be allowed on your balcony as was cigarettes....:D

 

Everything I could find prior to the ban for cigarettes said cigar smoking was allowed in the cigar bar (if there was one) or a designated cigar smoking location. They never said it was "allowed" on balconies, so it's a semantics issue.

Edited September 6, 2014 by BND

[Sitzmark]

Statistics/polls can never be completely believed. The statisticians are hired by people with an agenda and often formulate questions to come to a desired outcome. Often they arbitrarily just leave out data. For example:

 

Do you really believe the unemployment rate is 6.1%? They don't count people who have "dropped out" of the workforce. Why?

 

My advice: be very wary when anyone quotes statistics/polls.

 

"There are three types of lies: Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics!"

 

Perhaps some polls can't be trusted, but I'll take the data of the CDC over the made up stats and "guesses" of people attempting to prove the point with manufactured data.

 

I always get amused by the "you can't believe numbers" argument. After all, the numbers were introduced in this thread to support the pro smoking agenda, but after those are shown to be untrue, we get the inevitable, "you can't believe in statistics" argument. The premise being that anecdotal evidence now trumps scientific studies and polling data. Yeah, right.