Random Notes, Explorer Maiden Voyage, LIVE

[Mr Rumor]

Our "interrupted" (as the Delta document status) return to the Land of Enchantment denied me one of my little post-trip pleasures this morning: Waking up wide-eyed in the wee hours and taking advantage of my jet lag by putting in several hours of catch-up work before 6 or 7 in my office. We did make a prudent choice in taking an early shuttle from the airport area Best Western, so that we could while away the hours until our noon flight to ABQ in the comfort of a Delta Sky Club. We're quite content here.

 

I almost never think to check out Cruise Critic member reviews, so thanks, Jackie, for the head's up on the two reviews and the review of yours that is in the queue. I did not speak with any passengers who were as downbeat overall on the MV as Teatowel was in his/her review, but I did hear occasional rumblings. The one that sticks in my mind this morning was the comment that Regent didn't do enough to make the MV "special." For example, a couple of passengers missed not having at least one formal night, or a special MV "gala," and another felt that the christening should have been a feature of the MV. (I found myself just now chuckling as I re-read the last sentence, as this was probably the most casual bunch of Regent male dressers Ginny and I had encountered on a cruise. I remember one night in Compass Rose looking around and noting that the seven gentlemen sitting closest to me were all wearing short-sleeved shirts.)

 

However, while many people mentioned a particular negative--the poor balcony sight lines in the Constellation Theater was mentioned far more frequently than any other pan--the negative overall reports were few. Overwhelmingly, passengers seemed very happy with the Explorer and the MV overall, despite the usual minor complaints regarding specific cabin issues that we hear or experience each cruise. (For the record, we had a very slow draining bathtub on the first night, and we were missing the little clothesline cord that spans the tub. We also experienced a soft sound in our wall whether we were docked or at sea. It would move around and announce itself in one- to three-second bursts. We named him "Ghostie" and made friends with him. He really wasn't a bother.)

 

While I'm posting there are a couple of things that I want to make mention of, but didn't get around to while onboard. First, the Internet was the best by far we've ever had on a Regent cruise. There were only two times we couldn't get a connection, with each down time lasting two to three hours. I know the first was due to MTN implementing some new software and suspect that was the explanation behind the second as well.

 

One reason for the improved internet experience beyond the increased bandwidth is the surfeit of Internet access points around the ship. I counted 14 relays on the starboard side of Deck 8 alone, one relay for approximately every three cabins. (I do want to add that two passengers reported a spotty connection in a portion of their Penthouse suites, and that we were perhaps fortunate to have an access point directly across across from our suite, 829.)

 

Second, the Explorer appears to ride very smoothly; even when cruising the white caps from Koper to Venice we barely noticed any movement. I'm looking forward to reading how the Explorer handles stormy conditions.

 

That's it for now, but I'm planning to do my usual end-of-cruise-blog "Photo Finish" post after we return home, so stay tuned!

 

Rich

Edited August 4, 2016 by Mr Rumor

[UUNetBill]

There was a very critical review posted which concerned me as it was based mainly on not liking the décor of the ship which, IMO, is not something that a ship should be reviewed on. After all, we all have different tastes.

Wow. I just read that review. Pretty harsh, and my takeaway was "I don't like dark wood and dinner wasn't great and took 3 hours one night." But that was what, a 12-night cruise? How were the other 11 dinners? The reviewer mentioned specialty restaurants - but there are three - how were the other two? How was Compass Rose? How was the bar service, the room service, the housekeeping service? How was Regent 'pandering' to their honchos and suppliers? I'm somewhat confused by this whole review... :confused:

[UUNetBill]

...the Internet was the best by far we've ever had on a Regent cruise. There were only two times we couldn't get a connection, with each down time lasting two to three hours. I know the first was due to MTN implementing some new software and suspect that was the explanation behind the second as well.

 

One reason for the improved internet experience beyond the increased bandwidth is the surfeit of Internet access points around the ship. I counted 14 relays on the starboard side of Deck 8 alone, one relay for approximately every three cabins. (I do want to add that two passengers reported a spotty connection in a portion of their Penthouse suites, and that we were perhaps fortunate to have an access point directly across across from our suite, 829.)

 

Rich, I'm glad to hear that the internet was good for you on Explorer - but ours was miserable on Navigator last month. We had an AP right outside of our cabin door and no matter which device I tried logging in with, I ALWAYS had a slow connection, and often got dropped after 7-10 minutes of being logged on. I was showing a strong signal to the AP, but still had issues logging on. I tried clearing my cache, resetting my tablet, and I even went on an 'internet hunting' trip one evening, taking my iPad to various public spaces around the ship, culminating in a stop in the computer room...where I sat at a terminal and STILL had miserably slow access. So slow as to be virtually unusable.

 

And it wasn't just me - everyone I talked to was complaining about it. I hope it was something simple they can get smoothed out. I'm looking forward to trying the access next April when we finally get to sail on Explorer!!

[Jestocost]

Wow. I just read that review. Pretty harsh, and my takeaway was "I don't like dark wood and dinner wasn't great and took 3 hours one night." But that was what, a 12-night cruise? How were the other 11 dinners? The reviewer mentioned specialty restaurants - but there are three - how were the other two? How was Compass Rose? How was the bar service, the room service, the housekeeping service? How was Regent 'pandering' to their honchos and suppliers? I'm somewhat confused by this whole review... :confused:

 

At least the negative review of the June 2016 Explorer cruise to Alaska has now been taken down. That one had me really confused. :o

[Travelcat2]

Wish that the negative review of the Explorer would be taken down. There will always been negative reviews but reviewing a new ship based on décor and slow service at one meal on its MV does not seem fair. One almost expects a few issues on the MV and there were issues on the CV as well (but nothing worth mentioning as they were small items in a few cabins that were fixed during the cruise). The fact that the Explorer was turned over to Regent late did make it harder on the servers as it gave them little time to get used to the new dining venues.

 

I have a friend on the current Explorer voyage and hope that she has time to post. If not, I'll get the scoop when she returns home.

 

Looking forward to more reports from the Explorer!

Edited August 4, 2016 by Travelcat2

[JPR]

I just read this so-called "review." I agree that it should be taken down, since it is nothing but a brief very poorly written and superficial rant with zero supporting details. The writer cannot even spell, misspelling "exciting" as "exiting" (twice in one sentence!) and "spoiled" as "spoilt". In our experience, by the way, we often have very pleasant three-hour dinners on cruises--so pleasant that we skip the show. Of course those dinners involve stimulating conversation, not a constant stream of complaining and misery that no doubt characterized this person's meal...

[UUNetBill]

I don't know about taking it down, as that borders on censorship just because we don't like something. I'm sure that if someone posted a brief review stating "The ship was awesome, the service was awesome, the cruise was awesome! Five stars!", no one would want it taken down because it was too short or not detailed enough.

 

But I do think there should perhaps be a participation requirement prior to posting reviews - I don't believe the reviewer had any forum posts and only the one review. It's as if CC was just an outlet to vent...because of dark wood and an overly long meal. Kinda sad.

[Host Dan]

I just read this so-called "review." I agree that it should be taken down, since it is nothing but a brief very poorly written and superficial rant with zero supporting details. The writer cannot even spell, misspelling "exciting" as "exiting" (twice in one sentence!) and "spoiled" as "spoilt". In our experience, by the way, we often have very pleasant three-hour dinners on cruises--so pleasant that we skip the show. Of course those dinners involve stimulating conversation, not a constant stream of complaining and misery that no doubt characterized this person's meal...

I hate to say it, but if CC "took down" every negative review, what would be the point of having reviews in the first place. One could also make a point of having reviews written by journalists, non-paying guests etc. be taken down due to bias.

[wripro]

I hate to say it, but if CC "took down" every negative review, what would be the point of having reviews in the first place. One could also make a point of having reviews written by journalists, non-paying guests etc. be taken down due to bias.

 

Couldn't agree more. That would be like voter restriction laws. We only want those who agree with us to vote or to post reviews.

[Travelcat2]

Actually, I do agree with Bill, Dan and wripro. Someone mentioned that a negative review of the Navigator was taken down - I was more or less responding to that. It was the first time that I have heard of a negative review being taken down. On the other hand, I do wish that CC members were allowed two sentence responses to reviews.

[Pamela1]

This forum is called CRUISE CRITIC for a reason.

If people don't like the reviews then they are welcome to submit their own ones.

 

I personally would look at all reviews to have a balanced judgement and if there were reviews removed then how could we all get an understanding of the way people think and what their preferences are.

I also wouldn't criticise someone for their spelling.

 

We are big fans of Regent but still want to see what others think.

 

Pam.

[Travelcat2]

This forum is called CRUISE CRITIC for a reason.

If people don't like the reviews then they are welcome to submit their own ones.

 

I personally would look at all reviews to have a balanced judgement and if there were reviews removed then how could we all get an understanding of the way people think and what their preferences are.

I also wouldn't criticise someone for their spelling.

 

We are big fans of Regent but still want to see what others think.

 

Pam.

 

Not sure why you are yelling!? Four of us already agreed with you and I have submitted a review and encouraged others to do so - regardless of what their feelings are about the Explorer.

 

On the other hand Dan, if you are still reading this thread, I just looked up the definition of "critic" and it does basically mean "a person who expresses an unfavorable opinion of something". Perhaps Cruise "Critic" could come up with a better name ...... how about "Cruise Reviews" (or anything that does have a negative connotation. Just something to think about.

Edited August 4, 2016 by Travelcat2

[Pamela1]

Not sure why you are yelling!? Four of us already agreed with you.

 

On the other hand Dan, if you are still reading this thread, I just looked up the definition of "critic" and it does basically mean "a person who expresses an unfavorable opinion of something". Perhaps Cruise "Critic" could come up with a better name ...... how about "Cruise Reviews" (or anything that does have a negative connotation. Just something to think about.

 

 

Where was i yelling? :confused:

 

Jackie, you surely know that there are other cruise forums out there?...No?

[flossie009]

Actually, I do agree with Bill, Dan and wripro. Someone mentioned that a negative review of the Navigator was taken down - I was more or less responding to that. It was the first time that I have heard of a negative review being taken down. On the other hand, I do wish that CC members were allowed two sentence responses to reviews.

 

I do not recall a negative review of Navigator being taken down :confused:

 

An early review of Explorer was taken down but only because it was obviously posted in error - before the ship had been handed over

 

 

 

I agree with other posters that all reviews - good, bad or indifferent - should be allowed. As a passenger, I like to see all comments and then decide for myself the weighting that I apply to each review

 

I do feel that reviewers should state clearly if they are a member of the travel industry (e.g. travel writer or TA) or have taken the cruise gratis as a guest of the cruiseline. For Explorer, this is particularly important for the early cruises

[eliana]

I do not know about the States and other countries, but in England it is normal to call a 'critic' someone who reviews something either favourably or unfavourably. I have always regarded Cruise Critic forums in this sense, i.e. both

favourable and unfavourable comments

[forgap]

Not sure why you are yelling!? Four of us already agreed with you and I have submitted a review and encouraged others to do so - regardless of what their feelings are about the Explorer.

 

On the other hand Dan, if you are still reading this thread, I just looked up the definition of "critic" and it does basically mean "a person who expresses an unfavorable opinion of something". Perhaps Cruise "Critic" could come up with a better name ...... how about "Cruise Reviews" (or anything that does have a negative connotation. Just something to think about.

 

Here we go again.....we don't need to parse every word here....negative, positive, neutral, I want to hear it all! I'm a reasonably intelligent grown up who can draw my own conclusions from the information out there.

 

In reading reviews it is fairly simple to conclude if the reviewer has the same world view as you do. Three hour dinners don't disturb me, but for some people 45 minutes is TOO long. (Note to self: don't have dinner with speed eaters who probably also limit fat and salt....and wine!)

[Travelcat2]

Here we go again.....we don't need to parse every word here....negative, positive, neutral, I want to hear it all! I'm a reasonably intelligent grown up who can draw my own conclusions from the information out there.

 

In reading reviews it is fairly simple to conclude if the reviewer has the same world view as you do. Three hour dinners don't disturb me, but for some people 45 minutes is TOO long. (Note to self: don't have dinner with speed eaters who probably also limit fat and salt....and wine!)

 

 

Truly do not know what you are referring to. I agreed with posters that did not want reviews taken down and also can draw my own conclusions from reviews. I am always taken aback when posters "yell" (aka writing in all caps). I can read just fine in normal print - even bolded or underlined print.

 

The comment about "Critic" in Cruise Critic was something I simply discovered today (had not thought about it). I'm wondering if this is why some posters only look at what is negative on a cruise rather than the whole picture. It is something worth considering (IMHO)

[flossie009]

There are apparently two/three definitions of 'critic':

 

1a: one who expresses a reasoned opinion on any matter especially involving a judgment of its value, truth, righteousness, beauty, or technique

 

1b: one who engages, often professionally, in the analysis, evaluation, or appreciation of works of art or artistic performances

 

2: one given to harsh or captious judgment

 

 

Most CC members try to keep to 1a, but human nature means that some slip into 2 occasionally

[warburg]

Thanks for excellent comments again, Travelcat2. I, too, read the negative review under discussion. The writer had very thin reasons for complaint and a rather petulant style. That the decor was displeasing isn't something that ranting can change. Surely no sane person expects decorators to rush in and redo the ship to suit an unhappy passenger. Poor service is another matter. A very slow dinner on a MV isn't a hanging offense with most people. For this person, though, writing about these matters on CC made more sense than speaking to someone on board who can resolve dining issues immediately. Odd.

 

Mary

Edited August 4, 2016 by warburg

[eliana]

Warburg is right. Poor decor cannot be changed on a new ship. If it is so grating then the only solution is not to travel on that ship again or until after its first major refit if it is then changed.

 

Poor service needs to be addressed immediately when onboard. Complain to the appropriate more sejor officer. It is not for Cruise Critic unless it is consistent. This is often an issue on Maiden voyages as crew get used to the new ship.

Edited August 4, 2016 by eliana

[Travelcat2]

As Eliana noted, "This is often an issue on Maiden voyages as crew get used to the new ship." I recall several posters that did not want to go on the MV (or any MV) because all of the issues are generally not worked out. Although the Explorer had two sailings prior to the MV, the MV was the first time that the ship was full. IMO, this should be taken into consideration. On our cruise, we found service in CR faster than normal (perhaps because most of the passengers were dining at 8:00 p.m.). Service in one of the specialty restaurants was slower than normal but nothing that was a concern to us (perhaps because they kept the wine flowing and we were enjoying great conversation).

 

flossie - See post #75 on this thread - regarding the removal of a review of the Navigator. Yes - there are many definitions. The first one I found had the negative connotation first:

 

1.a person who expresses an unfavorable opinion of something

 

2.a person who judges the merits of literary, artistic, or musical works, especially one who does so professionally

 

The second definition has more to do with "professional" critics rather than

amateurs. In any case, IMO, the word "critic" has meant finding fault with something. Perhaps it is different in the U.K.(?)

 

P.S. Mary, see you in 3 months and 10 days:)

[Pamela1]

Truly do not know what you are referring to. I agreed with posters that did not want reviews taken down and also can draw my own conclusions from reviews. I am always taken aback when posters "yell" (aka writing in all caps). I can read just fine in normal print - even bolded or underlined print.

 

The comment about "Critic" in Cruise Critic was something I simply discovered today (had not thought about it). I'm wondering if this is why some posters only look at what is negative on a cruise rather than the whole picture. It is something worth considering (IMHO)

 

Jackie, "in my opinion" i was not being rude. I highlighted the cc forum (i'm sure you got that in small print)

No-one has yelled that i'm aware of but you seem to have an issue with some people on this thread.......

If i dare to tread then i feel that we all should have an opinion but it seems that some are more worthy that others.

 

 

PS, Rich, i apologise for this change in plan from your wonderful observations of the Explorer.

Hope you have got home safe and looking forward to your post evaluations.

 

Pam.

[flossie009]

Please see responses below:

 

 

flossie - See post #75 on this thread - regarding the removal of a review of the Navigator.

 

Sorry, Can't see anything relevant in Post 75

 

 

Yes - there are many definitions.

 

So on CC let's go with the 'reasoned opinion' rather than the negative definition

 

[eliana]

You are right Travelcat that the name Cruise Critic implies criticism and most people would consider this to reflect unfavourable comments. The name is thus misleading although it does containe good as well as bad reviews. Maybe it should be called Cruise Advisor, but how could the name be changed without causing enormous confusion.

Let's get back to Explorer on this thread, or maybe a new one for its forthcoming cruise(s).

[Host Dan]

How about a food critic?? Doesn't mean bad, good. Just means that persons opinion.