Vaping on quantum of the seas

[Guest phd1003]

This is so much fun...

[Engineroom Snipe]

2 minutes ago, phd1003 said:

This is so much fun...

 

It is a slow day. ☺️

[S.A.M.J.R.]

36 minutes ago, Engineroom Snipe said:

 

1. Apples and Oranges argument.

 

A. When guests do not dress according to a dress code, my potential for having that violation affect my health (except my eyesight 🤔) is nonexistent.

 

B. There have been no long-term studies of the effects of vapor particulate on those who inhale secondhand vapor. The possibility of my health being affected by secondhand vapor does exist.

 

Lack of cruise etiquette, such as chair hogs, dress code violations, etc., etc., does not affect my health. 

 

You are grasping at straws to justify your actions. 

 

1.  No, my "argument" is simply that a rule is a rule.  Why is it OK to choose to follow some rules and not others?

 

A. So you're ok with people ignoring the "don't save pool loungers rule" since your potential for having that violation affect your health is nonexistent?

 

B. I didn't bring up anything about health studies.  

 

2. EXACTLY what actions of MINE am I justifying?  And be careful before you assume anything. 

 

My point is simply everyone has no problem justifying breaking rules they don't agree with (whether that be vaping in cabins, ignoring dress codes, saving seats, or speeding), but when someone else "breaks" a rule they DO agree with, "off with their heads!".

 

If Royal is not going to hold people accountable for breaking the rules (again, whether it be dress code, saving seats, or vaping/smoking), then the complaints should go to Royal. 

[Guest phd1003]

19 minutes ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

1.  No, my "argument" is simply that a rule is a rule.  Why is it OK to choose to follow some rules and not others?

 

A. So you're ok with people ignoring the "don't save pool loungers rule" since your potential for having that violation affect your health is nonexistent?

 

B. I didn't bring up anything about health studies.  

 

2. EXACTLY what actions of MINE am I justifying?  And be careful before you assume anything. 

 

My point is simply everyone has no problem justifying breaking rules they don't agree with (whether that be vaping in cabins, ignoring dress codes, saving seats, or speeding), but when someone else "breaks" a rule they DO agree with, "off with their heads!".

 

If Royal is not going to hold people accountable for breaking the rules (again, whether it be dress code, saving seats, or vaping/smoking), then the complaints should go to Royal. 

So where does it end? Meth labs in people's cabins. Sure that's against the rules but are you going to advocate for that as well

[graciekelli]

On 1/25/2023 at 3:38 PM, jean87510 said:

Unfortunately yes.  It was the one thing I loved at the restart when the smoking WAS banned in the casinos.  We actually played the slots with some leftover OBC and won on one of the smokeless casino cruises.  

My older 30 yr old daughter vapes as does my 32 yr old oldest son.  I have a keen sense of smell and don't even know they are doing it.  I don't like it but I hate the cigarettes more because of the smell.  I watch people on every cruise vaping on the balconies and smelled nothing.  I could smell a cigarette on my last cruise about 7 or 8 cabins down.  

My feeling is that the cruise lines should if they haven't already do research on any possible fire hazard of vaping on the ships.  And get an actual scientific study of how vaping can cause any second hand smoke lung damage.  This way all bases would be covered.

I don't smoke.  But I do love the smell of someone smoking. I'm weird.  It brings this nostolgic memory of sitting in the back of my grandparents car with the windows rolled up and the both of them smoking away.🥰

[Engineroom Snipe]

40 minutes ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

1.  No, my "argument" is simply that a rule is a rule.  Why is it OK to choose to follow some rules and not others?

 

A. So you're ok with people ignoring the "don't save pool loungers rule" since your potential for having that violation affect your health is nonexistent?

 

B. I didn't bring up anything about health studies.  

 

2. EXACTLY what actions of MINE am I justifying?  And be careful before you assume anything. 

 

My point is simply everyone has no problem justifying breaking rules they don't agree with (whether that be vaping in cabins, ignoring dress codes, saving seats, or speeding), but when someone else "breaks" a rule they DO agree with, "off with their heads!".

 

If Royal is not going to hold people accountable for breaking the rules (again, whether it be dress code, saving seats, or vaping/smoking), then the complaints should go to Royal. 

 

You are correct that you did not bring up anything about health studies.

 

I did.

 

If breaking the rules or ignoring policies onboard affect my health or safety, I will elevate the issue "up" the ladder of accountability as necessary.

 

Edited February 1, 2023 by Engineroom Snipe
typo

[S.A.M.J.R.]

23 minutes ago, phd1003 said:

So where does it end? Meth labs in people's cabins. Sure that's against the rules but are you going to advocate for that as well

Please find one post of mine where I "advocated" for vaping.  I'll wait...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yup, that's what I thought.  All I'm doing is calling out the hypocrites who are getting on their high horses about others not following the rules, when they have no problem admitting not following the rules they disagree with.

 

The bottom line is it's up to Royal to enforce (or not) any rule that's in place.   

[Mum2Mercury]

On 1/29/2023 at 3:08 PM, joeyancho said:

No, it is not.  It no longer exists.

Dress codes really don't exist on three-day cruises.  Wow, three-days are a different animal.  

12 hours ago, TopoChico said:

You can absolutely NOT  tell when a person comes from a home where there is vaping. No way. No how. Just Nope. 

Agree.  That's also why we can't catch high school kids vaping in the bathroom -- to their detriment.  

4 hours ago, pcur said:

Your body; your lungs; your decision.  Me? I grew up with 2nd hand smoke until I was 18, so I'll pass on the vaping cabin mate.

I also grew up in a house with second-hand smoke -- wasn't my decision, but I do still pay a price for my parents' decisions today.  

3 hours ago, Kitalion said:

I also grew up with second hand smoke.  Which is why I support vaping and especially the medical vapes prescribed in Australia.  It isn’t smoking.  

No, it's not smoking, but it's related, and it carries its own dangers.  Two things can be dangerous.  

1 hour ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

So it's "OK" to disobey "rules" because you don't agree with them?    And if you use the argument about Royal not enforcing the dress code, if they don't enforce "no vaping in cabins", what's the difference? 

No, not okay to disobey rules -- but vaping in a private stateroom isn't an enforceable rule.  

[goldfish65]

2 hours ago, graciekelli said:

I don't smoke.  But I do love the smell of someone smoking. I'm weird.  It brings this nostolgic memory of sitting in the back of my grandparents car with the windows rolled up and the both of them smoking away.🥰

Me too! Love the smell of the casino, or sitting on the deck 5 promenade near the smokers. Reminds me of a time when people didn't worry about every little thing. If only somehow I could relive the smell of a 1960's airport.....coffee, cigarettes and kerosene!

[Mum2Mercury]

3 hours ago, graciekelli said:

I don't smoke.  But I do love the smell of someone smoking. I'm weird ...

34 minutes ago, goldfish65 said:

Me too! Love the smell of the casino, or sitting on the deck 5 promenade near the smokers ...

Yuck, I'd rather have a skunk in my living room than a smoker.  Seriously, I was surprised when one person said this -- but two?  

[davekathy]

If more and more people keep bragging about vaping in their cabin and tell others the cabin attendant basically has said, no problem maybe eventually RC will get wind of it (pun intended) and do something about it. Loose lips sink ships.  For now, outta sight, outta mind. 

[Mum2Mercury]

10 minutes ago, davekathy said:

If more and more people keep bragging about vaping in their cabin and tell others the cabin attendant basically has said, no problem maybe eventually RC will get wind of it (pun intended) and do something about it. Loose lips sink ships.  For now, outta sight, outta mind. 

I'm not defending smoking /vaping /breaking of rules ... but what can they do about vaping in private cabins?  It's essentially an invisible crime.  How would they know?  How could they prove guilt? 

[Engineroom Snipe]

6 minutes ago, davekathy said:

If more and more people keep bragging about vaping in their cabin and tell others the cabin attendant basically has said, no problem maybe eventually RC will get wind of it (pun intended) and do something about it. Loose lips sink ships.  For now, outta sight, outta mind. 

 

Vape devices operate anywhere between 335 degrees F to 430 degrees F.  A few battery failures (some use Lithium-Ion) or device malfunctions in the cabins will get RCI's attention.

[Kitalion]

7 minutes ago, davekathy said:

If more and more people keep bragging about vaping in their cabin and tell others the cabin attendant basically has said, no problem maybe eventually RC will get wind of it (pun intended) and do something about it. Loose lips sink ships.  For now, outta sight, outta mind. 

Well I’m just being honest here = either Royal will grant the formal permission we have requested and have it treated as any other legally prescribed medication and let her take it with dignity away from second hand smoke OR she is still going to do it in the cabin anyway and take her chances with being kicked off.  Everything in life has a consequence I guess.  Sorry if that infuriates people it’s just how it is.

[davekathy]

1 minute ago, Mum2Mercury said:

I'm not defending smoking /vaping /breaking of rules ... but what can they do about vaping in private cabins?  It's essentially an invisible crime.  How would they know?  How could they prove guilt? 

All I was doing was thinking out loud. Not in my job description and way above my paygrade. Something for RC to figure out, if they really care (?).   

[davekathy]

2 minutes ago, Kitalion said:

Well I’m just being honest here = either Royal will grant the formal permission we have requested and have it treated as any other legally prescribed medication and let her take it with dignity away from second hand smoke OR she is still going to do it in the cabin anyway and take her chances with being kicked off.  Everything in life has a consequence I guess.  Sorry if that infuriates people it’s just how it is.

I was also. So until you hear from RC let it go. Then come back and share their response. 

[Mum2Mercury]

10 minutes ago, Engineroom Snipe said:

Vape devices operate anywhere between 335 degrees F to 430 degrees F.  A few battery failures (some use Lithium-Ion) or device malfunctions in the cabins will get RCI's attention.

Are we talking fires? 

8 minutes ago, Kitalion said:

Well I’m just being honest here = either Royal will grant the formal permission we have requested and have it treated as any other legally prescribed medication ...

But vapes -- at least the vast majority -- aren't legally prescribed medication.  

5 minutes ago, davekathy said:

All I was doing was thinking out loud. Not in my job description and way above my paygrade. Something for RC to figure out, if they really care (?).   

Key phrase being "if they really care".  How does it affect their business?  Obviously, if someone sets a room on fire, that's a big deal to them, but does it cost them money?  increase the cabin steward's work load? 

 

Asking, not telling, but I suspect the bottom line is that they won't make a change unless forced to do so. 

[Kitalion]

4 minutes ago, davekathy said:

All I was doing was thinking out loud. Not in my job description and way above my paygrade. Something for RC to figure out, if they really care (?).   

Thank you Davekathy.  9 pages of commentary later we have come full circle.  Royal don’t care to enforce it - for whatever reason.  They could if they wanted to but they dont.  And that was the point of my very first post.  

[lovesthebeach2]

5 hours ago, The_Big_M said:

 

That's not the way it is.

 

Due to early concerns about their safety, any ecigarette containing nicotine was moved to prescription only status, so it no longer could be legally sold in shops and other retailers. This change wasn't anything to do with a "commitment to become a tobacco free country" but to restrict access to them. So yes, legally, that is now the only way it can be acquired, but that's to give a remnant of justification to use one, given uncertainty on safety, not that it's recommended or approved.

 

In fact, not a single e-cigarette has been medically approved by our regulator, again due to the same safety concerns. The regulator is explicit that all e-cigarettes are "unapproved" as they have have not been assessed by the TGA for safety, quality and efficacy. They also explicitly state: "The long-term health risks of unapproved nicotine vaping products, even those that comply with TGO 110, are still unclear and the evidence of their potential efficacy for smoking cessation is currently mixed."

 

OTOH, other smoking cessation aids such as patches and gums have been assessed for the above, and are Approved.

 

Thus, for those that want them the only way they can get them is to plead a case from a friendly doctor for a prescription, in spite of the lack of medical evidence, approval or support of them.

 

 

Thank you for telling us the whole story regarding the “prescriptions”.

[davekathy]

Just now, Mum2Mercury said:

Key phrase being "if they really care".  How does it affect their business?  Obviously, if someone sets a room on fire, that's a big deal to them, but does it cost them money?  increase the cabin steward's work load? 

 

Asking, not telling, but I suspect the bottom line is that they won't make a change unless forced to do so. 

Exactly why I said it. My Magic 8 Ball says, "cannot predict now". 

[davekathy]

4 minutes ago, Kitalion said:

Thank you Davekathy.  9 pages of commentary later we have come full circle.  Royal don’t care to enforce it - for whatever reason.  They could if they wanted to but they dont.  And that was the point of my very first post.  

My pleasure. 😉

[lovesthebeach2]

4 minutes ago, Kitalion said:

Thank you Davekathy.  9 pages of commentary later we have come full circle.  Royal don’t care to enforce it - for whatever reason.  They could if they wanted to but they dont.  And that was the point of my very first post.  

So exactly what was the point of your very first post?

To let everyone else know it’s ok to break the rules and do what you want because you feel you deserve it? 
 

Or that Royal doesn’t seem to care about those that break the rules and feel they deserve it?

So let us know what WAS the point of your original post?

[Kitalion]

Just now, lovesthebeach2 said:

So exactly what was the point of your very first post?

To let everyone else know it’s ok to break the rules and do what you want because you feel you deserve it? 
 

Or that Royal doesn’t seem to care about those that break the rules and feel they deserve it?

So let us know what WAS the point of your original post?

If u didn’t understand the point of it - why are u still following along 9 pages later? The post is still there - u can re-read it for yourself.

[sft429]

10 minutes ago, Kitalion said:

Thank you Davekathy.  9 pages of commentary later we have come full circle.  Royal don’t care to enforce it - for whatever reason.  They could if they wanted to but they dont.  And that was the point of my very first post.  

 

So one steward on one ship looked the other way when he caught your friend vaping.  That is not evidence that Royal doesn't care to enforce it, just that  one steward didn't care to enforce it.

[S.A.M.J.R.]

37 minutes ago, Engineroom Snipe said:

 

Vape devices operate anywhere between 335 degrees F to 430 degrees F.  A few battery failures (some use Lithium-Ion) or device malfunctions in the cabins will get RCI's attention.

I don't get the Lithium-Ion argument.  Don't cell phones, tablets, and laptops (among other things) also use them?  Some battery failures in those and you think RCI will say "no more cell phones allowed"?