Complaining Couple Banned from RCI

[excitedofharpenden]

 

My expectations of RCI are seriously lowered right now just before my first cruise with them. So all this discussion has made it more likely i'll just take whatever happens on my cruise as the way it is and not bother telling anyone else about anything (meaning rci) other than it met my expectations.

 

As I expressed earlier, that is the saddening part about this story. You shouldn't and mustn't feel that way because of it. You just need to take heed from others here who say there is much more to this than purely the posting of negative comments on a message board. Sadly the community guidelines here preclude the full facts being detailed, but believe me when I say you'd need to go a lot further than an adverse review of a cruise line. It has to be more systematic than that.

 

Phil

[brianep1968]

I don’t blame them for complaining on certain issues but you can tell they are the sort of people to complain that their French toast wasn’t prepared by someone who speaks French. I would have been upset over the sewage on the floor as well but RCCL made a generous compensation offer, I would have shut up and enjoyed the comp.

[AnotherCruisingKid]

Now wait a minute -- I don't really agree. Let me give you an analogy: Today at work I ran into a problem; I'd done something wrong, and when I realized I'd caused trouble for someone, I could not erase the problem, but I could do some little things to make it better. I went out of my way to offer the person involved something "extra" to make ammends for my mistake. She walked away knowing that mistakes happen, but I'd done what I could to be fair and make it better.

 

Does this person now have the right to blast me publically for having made the mistake?

 

Yes. That person does. Just as you have the right to reply saying what you did for that person and if that wasnt enough, we dont need that person any more.

[Carefreecelt]

Confidentiality agreements would solve the problem for RCCL, but it's difficult to put a complainer's rants back in the bottle after they are posted all over the web. People do have a First Amendment right to say what they want; however, each corporate entity has a right to 'fire' clients who persistently complain or push the limits of fairness in their criticism.

[Happy ks]

My expectations of RCI are seriously lowered right now just before my first cruise with them. So all this discussion has made it more likely i'll just take whatever happens on my cruise as the way it is and not bother telling anyone else about anything (meaning rci) other than it met my expectations.

 

YAY for lower standards....

 

 

 

That's a shame, to let this situation do this to you. We've been on RCI and several other lines and while not every cruise has been perfect, we've always been excited to go back. The thread and this situation has absolutely nothing to do with lowered service from RCI, rather a decision made by a company to eliminate a customer who will never, ever be satisfied.

 

There are a few things you need to reconsider, first off, this discussion would not have gone on for as long as it has had it not been for the history of the poster who wrote the review. Too much story telling on her part for her to remain believable. Many people who recognize her from over the years can attest to that.

 

I don't think the support for RCI from CC members here is unfounded, many just recognize the ban has little to do with one review, the complaints just piled up too high for RCI. I think RCI bent over backwards to appease her, yet the complaints continued, any business has the right to refuse service to an individual after being treated this way.

 

I love reading reviews here on CC and especially the ones that aren't totally glowing, I think I've learned by others mistakes. I don't think RCI bans everyone from cruising their ships that has had a mishap, quite the contrary, they try to make them happy. They tried to do that with this person and it sounds like it didn't work out for them.

 

 

I didn't read the tripso link, but I'm almost wondering if this person didn't go to the media after seeing the publicity the family with the sick baby got??? ;) The timing is just too good.

[isujim]

As a reminder..........try and seperate fact from speculation. We don't really know if there was sewage on the floor. It was in a review but that doesn't mean it was fact. Consider your source and past history and then come to some conclusion (which may or may not be accurate).

 

I would just not take anything as gospel just because somebody said so.

[erisajd]

Confidentiality agreements would solve the problem for RCCL, but it's difficult to put a complainer's rants back in the bottle after they are posted all over the web. People do have a First Amendment right to say what they want; however, each corporate entity has a right to 'fire' clients who persistently complain or push the limits of fairness in their criticism.

 

The First Amendment right of free speech ONLY applies to government attempting to control speech. The Constitutuion and Bil of Rights control ONLY the actions of the Federal Government - it does not control actions between individuals. A corporation, web site or any other private entity can control speech as it deems fit - ergo TOS. Please, people, learn what your rights mean, not what you hear them described as in a sound bite.

[AnotherCruisingKid]

I didn't read all 12 pages so I apologize if someone else has already made this point. What got the person banned from Royal Caribbean wasn't the negative comments posted on this web site. What got her banned was the fact that she posted the compensation she had received by complaining. Therefore encouraging others to do the same. This in the cruise lines eyes is a BIG no-no. My advice to others is keep any perks or compensation you receive to yourself.

 

I completely and flat out do NOT believe this point.

[AnotherCruisingKid]

I don't think you should lower your standards or expect less because of this incident. The reason this is being discussed is because there is a history well documented on these boards of certain people going out of their way to find problems so that they can get comps...in a word fraud! You will have a great cruise and should expect so!!!

 

Oh I agree. I was being mostly sarcastic about my expectations.

 

From what I've read (i have never met the people involved) I believe this "banning" is in the best interests of the company.

 

But I do not believe it was done for any reason other than a pattern of complaining.

 

I know I am going to have a great time next friday. And honestly am looking forward to being at sea WITHOUT someone telling me its time to work.

 

However I will add that my expectations for the food have honestly been lowered due to the many many reviews posted here. Not in this thread but at CC in general.

[emjsea]

No one has a "right" to have every little thing in your life go perfectly. Please. Cookies break. Sometimes you don't get all the little perks you got last time (they are gifts, not something you have a "right" to). Soooo sorry there was a wrinkle on your blanket after the bed was made. I can't imagine people like this every being happy anywhere.

[CruisinNole]

The story isn't available for viewing on MSNBC anymore - I wonder why.

 

I just read the story on MSNBC.com and sent it to my husband.

[nrdsb4]

I completely and flat out do NOT believe this point.

 

 

Wow! You've been a member for less than 6 months, yet you do not believe members here who have been reading her posts for years. I have seen many many posts of hers bragging about the compensation she has received for her multiple complaints. I have even seen her encourage others to do the same for completely trivial concerns.

[nrdsb4]

I don’t blame them for complaining on certain issues but you can tell they are the sort of people to complain that their French toast wasn’t prepared by someone who speaks French. I would have been upset over the sewage on the floor as well but RCCL made a generous compensation offer, I would have shut up and enjoyed the comp.

 

If you will read her review, it mentions nothing of the sort. She complains of a sewage smell (I would, too) for her whole cruise. As unpleasant as that is, that is a far cry from having raw sewage on your floor and carpet.

[reallyitsmema]

Wow! You've been a member for less than 6 months, yet you do not believe members here who have been reading her posts for years. I have seen many many posts of hers bragging about the compensation she has received for her multiple complaints. I have even seen her encourage others to do the same for completely trivial concerns.

Whether the poster has been a member for 6 days, 6 months or 6 years, they do not have to agree with a long time posters comments. There are many long time posters that I disagree with just about everything they post.

 

I do not think the review is the only thing that got this couple banned. Their history of complaints directly to RCL and most likely, their posts here about compensation were a factor also.

 

None of us knows the whole story.

[AnotherCruisingKid]

Wow! You've been a member for less than 6 months, yet you do not believe members here who have been reading her posts for years. I have seen many many posts of hers bragging about the compensation she has received for her multiple complaints. I have even seen her encourage others to do the same for completely trivial concerns.

 

What I dont believe is that it was "Discussion of compensation" that got the person banned. The point the poster I quoted was making.

 

I believe it was the pattern of complaining and seeking compensation that got the cruisers banned.

 

Just like pattern drug seekers in a doctors office.

 

So someone's time on site or history on site really has nothing to do with this. I was not saying anything about the poster I quoted other than I disagree with this one point they are making.

[reallyitsmema]

If you will read her review, it mentions nothing of the sort. She complains of a sewage smell (I would, too) for her whole cruise. As unpleasant as that is, that is a far cry from having raw sewage on your floor and carpet.

Quoted from the MSN article:

 

Last September, during a 14-night Alaska and Northwest sailing onboard Radiance of the Seas, their stateroom had a plumbing problem that ended up with sewage all over the bathroom that overflowed onto the room’s carpet. Even with cleaning, the room wasn’t acceptable. The Morans asked repeatedly to be moved to another stateroom, but was told the ship was full

.

[amybear912]

Quoted from the MSN article:

 

.

 

 

but her review posted here does not say that... that's where the discrepancy is... What she posted here is not the same as what she told MSNBC... ultimately, that may have been her downfall...

[Gixer]

The MSN article metions raw sewege all over the place but if you read the womans Cruise Critic review she mentions no such thing, she just says there was a ''sewege smell'' Im sure if the toilet had overflowed she would definatley have said so in her original CC review and posted numerous threads about the incident. The sewege story seems to have been greatly embelished in the MSN article.

[Bennett'sCruise]

Quoted from the MSN article:

 

.

 

The quote from the MSN article was taken from the original article written by Anita (something) on Tripso ... This Anita took the words from the mouth of the problem passenger ... who has a history of embellishing things as time goes along. Problem passenger's first report was that it smelled bad ... now all of a sudden it's pouring all over the floor.

All this is just a HINT of why there were probs.... And, whoever said it was the just the tip of the iceberg is absolutely correct.

IMHO, Author Anita of Tripso was scammed by the sammers ... :o

[bae54]

If the question is whether a cruise line has the right to ban someone, I think the obvious answer is yes -- if the person violates the cruise contract or some other agreement. Does it make any sense to ban someone over something they write about the company on the internet? I don't think it does. And this article wouldn't stop me from posting my opinion on this forum.

 

The real bone of contention may be public mention of compensation. If I had a legitimate complaint about my cruise and the line compensated me in some manner, I don't think I would post the details of that compensation online. I might indicate that the company had resolved the issue to my satisfaction, but that's it.

 

Karen

 

 

Amen, that was the crust of the problem. According to RCL they asked her to remove the post reguarding the compensation and she refused stating freedom of speach. That was the reason they were banned; that and they had been on 6 cruises with RCL and there had been complaints about almost all of them. What I do not understand is; is if they kept having problems that made it necessary to write the company about, why keep going back. According to article they recieved some complaints from people on this board stating they felt she was advertizing ways to get compensation. She cannot really complain because the company followed thru with a check for $500 that they had been promised towards their next cruise with them.

[reallyitsmema]

The quote from the MSN article was taken from the original article written by Anita (something) on Tripso ... This Anita took the words from the mouth of the problem passenger ... who has a history of embellishing things as time goes along. Problem passenger's first report was that it smelled bad ... now all of a sudden it's pouring all over the floor.

 

All this is just a HINT of why there were probs.... And' date=' whoever said it was the just the tip of the iceberg is absolutely correct.[/font']

 

IMHO, Author Anita of Tripso was scammed by the sammers ... :o

I agree that the review mentions a smell not a "pouring all over the floor". I was directling my post at the poster who commented that it said it was a smell only who had quoted someone else referring to what I just quoted from the MSN article. Clear as mud, right?:eek: ;) :)

[FrancescaH]

I've read some of the posts of the user involved in this story. I wouldn't believe there was sewage on the floor on her word alone with her history of complaints. And that might be all the journalist used to support his story so pointing out the article means little. I'd love to see photos of sewage on the floor and then maybe I'd believe it.

 

Some people are professional complainers who seek to breeze through life paying little because of their big mouths. Companies have the right to deny those people the pleasure of their business.

[wolfganghowell]

msnbc or whoever originated the news "story" did not fact check or get the full story. They took the word of this one person and did not background check the source. First rule of journalism and they failed. :(

 

The person who was "banned" has reviews on this board that bear no resemblance to the posts made on numerous threads. I don't for one second believe the ban had anything to do with Cruise Critic. I believe it was based on a pattern of behavior involving direct dealings with the cruiseline.

 

Use some common sense here - do you honestly believe the cruise line would leave people in a room with raw sewage on the floor? COME ON!!! OF COURSE NOT. Yes, there might have been the smell that many of use have smelled from time to time. We had it once on a cruise where almost everytime we were on our balcony we could smell it. We chalked it up to a bad location, made brief mention in our survey and it had zero impact on our cruise (ok - maybe 1% impact since we didn't go on the balcony as much :))

 

And RCI probably asked this person to remove what was incorrect information or downright lies in posts. (pick whichever description fits your comfort level.) Yes - perhaps they could sue for libel if the information is deliberate lies but it's not worth their effort - asking her to remove it was worth the attempt.

 

I've seen a lot of posts that were either unbelievable or downright preposterous. I'm glad RCI took the stand they did.

 

As for the comment a few pages back about it being a conflict of interest to have cruise lines advertise here - :eek: :eek:. Come on, this is the perfect venue for them. I work in the industry (advertising) - every single chat board on the internet has advertisers that fit their member's interests. I don't want to see ads for dishwashers on cruise board! :D It's called smart marketing.

[AnotherCruisingKid]

Amen, that was the crust of the problem. According to RCL they asked her to remove the post reguarding the compensation and she refused stating freedom of speach. That was the reason they were banned; that and they had been on 6 cruises with RCL and there had been complaints about almost all of them. What I do not understand is; is if they kept having problems that made it necessary to write the company about, why keep going back. According to article they recieved some complaints from people on this board stating they felt she was advertizing ways to get compensation. She cannot really complain because the company followed thru with a check for $500 that they had been promised towards their next cruise with them.

 

As far as I know the mods here strip us ALL of that ability after a mere 30 minutes. So that would have been impossible for the user to do anyway.

[Cuizer2]

As far as I know the mods here strip us ALL of that ability after a mere 30 minutes. So that would have been impossible for the user to do anyway.

 

That is not correct. By clicking on the red triangle in the upper right corner a poster can ask to have a post removed. In fact, anyone else can do the same. Usually a non-poster will ask to have a post removed if that person finds the post offensive. But the original poster, realizing that (s)he made a mistake, can also ask to have a post removed.