Smoking or no smoking

[Pontius Navigator]

Should smoking be permitted in cabins, on balconies, inside and on deck or should it be restricted or banned?

[cruisebore]

As a Carnival shareholder I would like to see a number of cabins for occupancy by smokers. Balcony cabins towards the stern being for smokers. One suitable lounge/entertainment venue properly ventilated for smokers.

If I was a non smoker I would think this a good deal.

Only the most selfish could disagree, and on what grounds?

Can't get the cabin of your choice; no difference with not being able to get your dining option, in fact it would encourage early booking.

Also a good thing for the shareholders of Carnival.

IMHO the current restrictions will be damaging the business any further restrictions could be catastrophic; having the effect of reducing choice and increasing prices

 

Cb

[Druke I]

I checked "outside decks", but think it should be limited to specific sections or venues, and do think there should be at least one indoor area (well ventilated) also for smokers, particularly in inclement weather.

 

I am a former smoker, who has not smoked for the last 19 years.

[Pontius Navigator]

Even stevens between tolerance and intolerance so far.

 

Subjectively I suspect that there are enough 'votes' after 11 that this will be the end result.

[Goldryder]

I went for limiting it to outside areas.

 

Carnival Paradise went completely non-smoking a few years ago and if failed abysmally. However since the Star Princess fire, I think attitudes have changed significantly as to the safety of smoking anywhere on a ship. Until that fire, everyone had heard about how dangerous it potentially could be and had the instructions about smoking drummed into them at every muster drill til they could probably repeat the words verbatim themselves, but until Star Princess, no-one had ever really seen the results as such of a badly discarded ciggie over the side.

 

Whether or not cruise companies decide to lay some of their fleet over to non-smoking and limit it on others remains to be seen. But the new rules incorporated into solas 2009/2010 following the recommendations put forward by the MAIB and IMO after Star Princess could well mean that cruise lines will have to consider banning smoking from all ships or at least be more careful as to where they allow it.

[The Monocled Mutineer]

Limit it to certain open deck areas. Permit no smoking near the rail.

[elixir]

I believe that it needs a lot of careful consideration. I gave up smoking about 8 years ago but my Girlfriend still smokes. We've just returned from a QM2 Transatlantic Crossing and the Smoking rules seem very unfair, especially when it wasn't that way when we booked the trip. Its obviously due to the current trend against smokers for very valid reasons but provisions still need to be made.

 

Most bars could have a completely separate smoking room for instance, would need a bit of remodelling but shouldn't be a mega hassle, doesnt have to be anything special but functional. Using only open decks is great in nice calm & warm weather but isn't very nice when the ship is at speed, or raining!

 

At the very least One All Day Bar plus the Nightclub should have a smoking area! I have no problem with a No Smoking Ship because we would just choose not to travel from the start which is much better than changing the rules every other week.

[cruisebore]

At the very least One All Day Bar plus the Nightclub should have a smoking area! I have no problem with a No Smoking Ship because we would just choose not to travel from the start which is much better than changing the rules every other week.

 

Exactly, but don't try and con us; if its no smoking or very limited say so. THEN I, and I suspect many others, will make other arrangements.

 

Cb

[Pontius Navigator]

I agree about open decks. On the sun deck, in light winds, smoke can be blown across to the non-smoking side.

 

Inside, in bars, unless the aircon is very good it can escape too.

 

On economics, when smoking was banned in aircraft there was a substantial saving in maintenance costs as the filters did not need changing with anywhere near the previous frequency.

 

Laws aside, the companies will be trying to balance bookings from smokers/non-smokers. Certainly many local pubs (2 our of 3 :)) have 'open deck' smoking. I don't know how their profits were affected.

[cruisebore]

 

 

Laws aside, the companies will be trying to balance bookings from smokers/non-smokers. Certainly many local pubs (2 our of 3 :)) have 'open deck' smoking. I don't know how their profits were affected.

 

PN

They are being effected in the worst possible way; four a day are closing down. We the nation's outlawed nicotine addicts, and some non-smokers are quietly taking our business elsewhere.

 

Regards

Cb

[AnnieC]

PN

We the nation's outlawed nicotine addicts, and some non-smokers are quietly taking our business elsewhere.

Cb

 

Exactly, Cb. The non-smokers, some of whom complained loudly about smoking onboard, despite it being strictly limited, have been listened to by many of the cruiselines. The smokers, who said not a word when they were permitted to smoke, are now voting with their feet. At present, there are one or two lines sailing from the UK with a reasonably liberal smoking policy, and I suspect that many smokers will transfer to them.

 

It may be worthwhile for the cruiselines to remember that about 25% of the population still smoke, and of that 25% many have non-smoking spouses/partners. They are potentially alienating getting on for 50% of their customers who, until now, have said little.

 

Annie

[cruisebore]

The smokers, who said not a word when they were permitted to smoke, are now voting with their feet. At present, there are one or two lines sailing from the UK with a reasonably liberal smoking policy, and I suspect that many smokers will transfer to them.

 

Annie

 

Annie

 

That is precisely what we did, but what was quite surprising was that non smoking cruises friends also cancelled and opted to join us.

 

Cb

[AnnieC]

Annie

 

That is precisely what we did, but what was quite surprising was that non smoking cruises friends also cancelled and opted to join us.

 

Cb

 

This is because most non-smokers, in common with most smokers, are perfectly reasonable people. Unfortunately cruiselines have listened to the rabid minority, always a mistake in business, and changed their policy in accordance with their wishes.

 

Pity they forgot that almost no-one declined to cruise with them because they permitted limited smoking inside, but that many smokers will now vote with their feet because they do not. Witness these boards - even the most vociferous anti-smokers still cruised with P&O before they introduced their new ideas.

 

Annie

[Pontius Navigator]

Statistic, don't you love 'em. Here is a preliminary analysis and I shall refine it after the poll closes.

 

69% support smoking whereas 31% want no-smoking.

 

65% do not want smoking on balconies against 33% that do.

 

Only 8% want unrestricted smoking.

 

This suggests, as Annie said, that most people are reasonable people.

[Cabinboy1943]

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man. GBS

 

Cb

 

Hear Hear cruisebore. A succinct rejoinder to an inevitable and boring comment. I am at a loss to explain the attitude of those who seem to think that their wishes and prejudices should over ride everything else. Tolerance, give and take etc are drowned beneath the supreme belief that they are right and anyone holding a conflicting view is wrong. A dismissive attitude in no way invalidates someone elses opinion just because it is opposite to what they might think.

 

cabinboy

[Pontius Navigator]

Thank you all:

 

71% support smoking whereas 29% want no-smoking.

 

64% do not want smoking on balconies against 36% that do.

 

Only 7% want unrestricted smoking.

 

So, who is being reasonable and who is unreasonable?

 

I didn't ask if you were a smoker or non-smoker but it would seem that 7% are being unreasonable for smoking anywhere and a further 22% for smoking in cabins, and you could argue that 29% are being unreasonable for no smoking at all.

 

Dispassionately Mrs PN and I, being reasonable, would go in the open-deck only lobby with Mrs PN suggesting a restricted block of balcony cabins low and aft on port side for smokers.

 

The most reasonable are those suggesting no smoking on balconies alone as they seem to be balancing both aspects.

[Pontius Navigator]

Oceans, sorry for closing the poll so soon but it was so that I could enjoy my cruise on Oceana that ended this morning.

 

I am pleased to say that we experienced smoke only once on our balcony and not at all on the Lido deck.

 

However we found that the Port side promenade deck was a no-go area as was LeClub. We passed through LeClub this morning en route to the Library prior to disembarking. It brought back memories of the old LMS railway carriages with a comfortable smell like a dirty ashtray.

[Host Walt]

For future reference, please keep in mind that this forum is designed to be a place to discuss cruising, not the moral, legal, legislative, medical and/or social aspects of smoking.

 

The topic, in this case, is a legitimate subject for open discussion. However as seems all too frequently to be the case, a discussion about smoking policies turned into a forum on smoking. Accordingly we have removed a number of posts because they are off topic.

 

There are appropriate places for such discussions and it isn't Cruise Critic.

 

TRY THIS - http://www.smokinglobby.com

 

OR THIS - http://www.smokingpassions.com/forums

[The Monocled Mutineer]

This thread is being "over-moderated" for want of a better term.

 

A perfectly reasonable question from me as to why some of the replies has been removed, has been removed itself.

 

Do not see the harm in going off topic (as if smoking on board and smoking in general is off topic) so long as folks are not abusive to another member or use vile language.

 

Derek Kane

[Pontius Navigator]

I think Walt was being polite and diplomatic.

[berwyn]

This thread is being "over-moderated" for want of a better term.

 

A perfectly reasonable question from me as to why some of the replies has been removed, has been removed itself.

 

Do not see the harm in going off topic (as if smoking on board and smoking in general is off topic) so long as folks are not abusive to another member or use vile language.

 

Derek Kane

Remember it is against board rules to question why a thread got poofed.

[Pontius Navigator]

Remember it is against board rules to question why a thread got poofed.

 

And mightily upsetting too. Full marks therefore to Walt for taking the trouble to explain why he had pruned the thread.

 

To repeat the original conclusion, a majority of people are happy for smoking to continue albeit in particular dedicated and separate places. A few want possibly unreasonable unrestricted smoking and a larger minority want no smoking at all.

 

Within this it is obvious that companies could strike a happy mean and look at smoking areas.

 

At a higher level however it is obvious that the days for smoking at sea are numbered. National smoking legislation applies within the territorial waters of many states and also to flagged vessels anywhere in the world. In the US certain states, predominantly the major cruise venue states, have equally restrictive legislation.

 

While there are clearly very strongly held views by some individuals in UK and possibly US (?) it should be very obvious from shore visits that many citizens from European countries and others on the American continent are predominantly smokers.

 

How the rules will be applied and policed is a difficult issue.

[The Monocled Mutineer]

Rules on these sorts of boards are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools.

 

No one should question the removal of abusive and genuinely offensive postings But for postings to be removed because they go off slightly of topic (the thread was about smoking - for & against - after all) marks out the moderator(s) as interfering in normal intercourse.

[Pontius Navigator]

TMM, you are a guest on these boards. Wise men are welcome in the house, but only if they follow the house rules.

 

The house rules in my local public house have always stated 'no smoking'. Had the wise man chosen to ignore the 'guidance' he would have been asked to leave. Now the rule is law. Would you still see the rule of law as guidance as you are a wise man? Are you condoning law breaking?

 

Had I been able to lock the thread I would have done so. As it is the moderator kindly pruned it to its essentials.

[Gerrym]

Rules on these sorts of boards are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools.

 

No one should question the removal of abusive and genuinely offensive postings But for postings to be removed because they go off slightly of topic (the thread was about smoking - for & against - after all) marks out the moderator(s) as interfering in normal intercourse.

 

 

Derek, you are cetainly acting a fool if you are not one.