Royal Champions

[cruisinMike]

It's unfortunate that you feel like only you and a few others can express their opinion and no one else can have a differing view. You continue to post the same misinformation over and over and it's quite maddening to continue to read things that you and others know isn't true. As I said, if you and others feel differently about Cruise Critic, that's unfortunate but completely your right. Nothing I say or do will sway that. You will only continue to use my differing opinion as ammunition for what you have to say. Eventually people that want to talk about cruising will do so and the rest can continue the fight on their own.

 

Cecilia, let's be clear at least. My problem is your disclosure on the bottom of the post reeked of the same cynicism of the RC group. Of course you can have opinion, like me, but when you want to join the cynicism of the RC group, don't expect to be handled with kid gloves because of a red title.

 

Now, do you have a link for the misinformation that I have posted or or are you being a product of the misinformation gang yourself. CC can ban me for honest questions. But once you throw out the misinformation title, you better back it up!

[emdia43]

Tired of reading this thread? Go to Google and do a search for "Cruise Critic Viral Marketing" and you'll have some fresh material.

 

There are other Cruise Enthusiast sites too- what they are saying about this Champion scheme makes for some very interesting reading! :)

[jaxon41]

I've been reading this for days and I'll tell you what I think............ The RC's are wasting their time effort and energy trying to explain themselves to a group of jealous people who apparently don't have the skill or ability to read a post, review, or article and disregard the junk!

 

HMMM...Are you saying that I do not possess the skill to "read, review and post."

 

Why is it "jealous" to question the effect of a "viral marketing program"...AS DESCRIBED BY THE LOYALTY MANAGER at RCCL...on the Internet posting dynamic of an opinion Board like this?

 

Are these kinds of words and comments supposed to hurt or embarrass a poster who is criticizing RCCL to the express purpose of silencing that poster or driving him away? Now, that would be contrary to an open, free discussion Board, wouldn't it?

 

Why are you referencing personal "qualities" about a poster ..."jealous" ...

"don't have the skill or ability to read a post, review, or article and disregard the junk! "...why are you debating in THOSE PERSONAL TERMS...instead explaining how we are wrong on the issue of viral marketing?

 

Interesting....

 

worth a repeat since the jealous accusation has popped up a couple of times since I started catching up on this thread -- AGAIN. You know this is exactly what happened on the mega fuel surcharge thread. I know I keep referencing that but it is the only other topic/thread, where you could see the exact same dynamics playing out. A great deal of posting dead horse, etc,, and then someone would enter who hadn't a clue what the bruhaha was all about, hadn't the time or inclination to read all the posts (and who the heck could have blamed them when the posts numbered in the thousands), and the discussion would start anew from the very basics -- so on and on it would go, more posts that the subject had been exhausted, dead horses, shut ups, stop the madness, flinging crap, etc. I become exhausted from trying to explain what the legal issues were, then, someone fresher and with more patience, would take over and try to explain. God bless them. It wasn't about not having enough money to cruise; it wasn't about hating RCCL; it wasn't about being a whiner or a complainer; it wasn't about not having a life ...

 

Many WERE capable of "getting it" -- all too many just didn't have the capacity, but as life will have it, in the end, even those were benefitted by the resolution. Many said "thanks," some admitted that even though they had been supportive of the cause, they never went the extra mile to fill out a complaint to the AG , but thanked those of us who did-- many others, just stuck the money in their pocket and faded into the sunset -- as blithely ignorant as when they first posted nastiness, but with a louder jingle in their pants.

[Admin]

Admin any thoughts on my questions ?

 

jj....

I don't make official comments for Cruise Critic unless directed to. I don't make policy. My comments are mine alone and I've made no official statements on Cruise Critic's behalf. If you've written to the community manager, I'm sure she'll respond but please know that many members are writing and it may take a while for a response.

 

My involvement in this thread was initially to try and have everyone step back, take a breath, let's not all jump to conclusions until more is known. In the beginning it was like a wild fire and many board guidelines were broken. Since then some facts have been presented, more opinions have come up and more misinformation is getting out there. This issue has taken on a completely emotional feel and is no longer about what it started out as. And no one seems to be willing to wait to see what will happen. Positions have been taken and no one is budging. This came to light close to the weekend and very little could be done when most offices are closed. I'm sure there will be a BIG disclosure by someone at some point. From who? I don't know but PR dictates that RCI needs to do something. Again, my opinion only.

 

I hope your questions are answered. As for me, I was a board member for years before becoming a host for a few more years before working for the company for just over a year now. I've been around a very long time and I've seen these types of things come up every once in a while. The only think I know for a fact is that most of the long time members here know what this site is about and it's enriched their cruising experience. Yes, there are bumps in the road but this site is about the cruise.

[xpcdoojk]

Unfortunately your premise to this post is incorrect which makes the rest of it moot. CC was not asked who they felt would make ideal candidates. CC, apparently, was supplied a list of names from RCI that THEY received from an outside source and asked if they could have their contact information. That is a very different scenario from your beginning statement.

 

OB, do you really think someone with a failed cruise message board wants to hear logic from anyone else?

 

jc

[Admin]

But once you throw out the misinformation title, you better back it up!

I would ask the same of you.

[Goldryder]

Conflict of interests...

 

Discussion boards are essentially places where unbiased views can be recorded, shared & discussed freely and without any fear of being bullied or intimidated. It also should be somewhere to discuss things that are objectionable to some and maybe not to others.

 

This scheme has been objectionable to many...not the scheme itself but the way it was created and how members were recruited. Had the company asked permission to post every minute detail of what they were doing and what they were intending and with an email contact address for those who were interested to contact for more information etc then everyone would have read it, judged it and either replied or ignored it.

 

The conflict is that you cannot have in all faith an unbiased discussion when the company your discussing had such a large presence...ie...RCI give the CC meet/mingle parties as an option for members here....what do RCI get in return....favourable posts, probably a discounted rate for advertising and a few other perks besides, no doubt. RCI don't do anything for nothing...I won't use the old phrase that there is no such thing as a free lunch, cos obviously insofar as this scheme there are free lunches for some.

 

Advertising is fine, great wonderful for both company and discussion board. It becomes objectionable when that very advertising impedes frank, unbiased and truthful discussion (or there is a DANGER of impartiality being taken away in any measure). It is also objectionable when a board is SEEN to be a party to such behaviour and is conducting themselves in what is commonly known in the trade as a corporate backscratch.

 

With all due respect, CC need to look at their own behaviour in this as much as anyone and they really do need to sit back and ask themselves a question...

 

Has RCI (and the other lines) taken advantage of CC by infiltrating too far, being too demanding in regard to bending rules to suit them......bluntly, can CC honestly say that if they turned to the lines and told them to either shape up or ship out and the lines backed off so there were no more M&M's, free cruises for the site owners etc, that this board would curl up and die?

 

A board is only as good as the members on it and bottom line is that you upset the members, they will take themselves elsewhere and this episode with RCI and the PR firm has done some damage, despite the denials from the powers at be. Trust is something no board can afford to lose...advertisers can be replaced, sponsors can be replaced but the trust of your membership is paramount, lose that and the advertisers & sponsors will walk away.

[xpcdoojk]

Now we know why you are Host Mike. Very well said. I made a similar comment about the circular nature of the postings and it is now to the dead horse point. And since certain foods are not to be mentioned ;) is it now time to put it to rest?

 

Mike has always been an excellent host.

 

jc

[coxswain]

Thank you Cecilia - i did email your address ( i can appreciate the ammount of emails CC is getting on this )

 

 

I just hope some middle ground can be found and that Statement from both RCI + CC is forthcoming so we can draw a line under this sorry mess.

 

 

The only think I know for a fact is that most of the long time members here know what this site is about and it's enriched their cruising experience. Yes, there are bumps in the road but this site is about the cruise.

 

 

 

I couldn't agree more - these boards are invaluable source to everyone new and old.

 

Of-course their bumps but we can learn from those bumps and hopefully smooth out the next sailing lol

 

 

 

 

jj......

[jaxon41]

The RCCL board has lost all credibility for me. I'm a Diamond RCCL cruiser and I'm done -- both with this board and with the cruiseline.

 

Last night I took a look at that eyefortravel social media conference that Laura attended. Interesting stuff, all about how to "exploit", actually their word, the social media for money -- monetizing, they call it. There was only one subtopic in a discussion group which I found that purported to talk about what to do when it blows up in your face and harms your brand.

 

I think eyeontravel could stand to invite some folks like you to their next conference -- maybe have Hazence give a paper on this -- maybe hire Ephraim to do a data mining analysis on this thread. I am sure in the viral marketing world this will become the classic study, as some writers say this is the first time THIS type of viral marketing has been done (not sure I am believing that, but I have read it several times). With headlines like -- Viral Marketing Sinks Cruise Critic -- you know the industry has to be watching.

 

I didn't properly identify my link to an earlier article I quoted on here in my bookmarks, so can't readily link it again. But it was from a travel writer who had reported on these conferences over a year ago, and writes about those in the travel industry who walked out, appalled at what they were seeing and hearing, and he goes on to say he asked why there weren't sessions on how the travel industry could use social networking to help them improve their brand, but they weren't interested.

[Admin]

I just hope some middle ground can be found and that Statement from both RCI + CC is forthcoming so we can draw a line under this sorry mess.

I agree! I've heard what Cruise Critic has said so far via post from the Community Manager and the Publisher of Cruise Critic. I'd LOVE to hear what RCI has to say.

[benicehavefun]

Interesting to note: (at least, to me)

 

1.) I have been reading other threads here and have found brand spanking new members (2 posts) posting the same old don't you say anything bad about RCI comments. This one I referenced, in particular, saying RCI higher prices are to seperate cruisers by class, i.e. RCI at the top and others lower class. Interesting mainly for the need for a new identity to post that way.

 

Also, another poster I noticed as I liked the avitar has posted on this thread and many others but the post count doesn't go up. Stayed at 7 on all 4 posts in one thread, then stayed at 9 on three pages of another. Is this a glitch or is something happening to make us think this poster is brand new? How can you contol number of post from going up? I know I can't.

 

Just asking cuz I'm curious like that.

[jaxon41]

So, I'm fairly "new" here. When I first arrived, I noticed the RC'ers had sort of a status about them. I was honestly under the impression they were RC'ers because CC designated them so. I'd have to go back and search but in the threads I read, that was my understanding from what was posted. Not a big deal to me, just the way the board was run. I do have to say though, I thought a few times about what I had to do to become a RC so I could get a free cruise. LOL

 

 

I did wonder, however, after reading this long thread, if somewhere, someone wasn't writing a paper on how a bulletin board community reacts in a situation such as this. Have we all become someone's research rat and we'll be studied, analyzed and published? LOL

 

Yep, we are the rats, and I do hope someone is working on a paper.

 

Jaxon -- Royal Chump, charter member

[Catnip]

Denise, it has been a non-secret group for almost two years. I certainly have known of it the entire time. Just because you don't know of it doesn't mean it is secret.

 

jc

 

Good point. Would I be more correct if I said instead of a "secret" group, that they are a "little known" group?

Because if they were so well known for the past 2 years, then why does there seem to be so darn many people here that have never heard of them, or really what they stood for? :confused:

 

Of course, perhaps everyone on this thread except for me had heard of them before and knew about their RCer group.

[Goldryder]

I agree! I've heard what Cruise Critic has said so far via post from the Community Manager and the Publisher of Cruise Critic. I'd LOVE to hear what RCI has to say.

 

You'll be waiting a very long time for any corporation to step up to the plate and admit that they were wrong in the execution of a product or scheme. They will undoubtably blame the PR company and CC for mishandling, misleading etc etc and they will distance themselves from the mess and say 'not my fault' and 'we didn't know anything about it'.

 

The day that ANY corporation stands up and says 'sorry but we have REALLY screwed up this time' will be the day that hell freezes over with sky blue pink ice served in a martini.

 

Anyone with any doubts about that, well remember Enron...'nothing wrong here' in public, selling shares like confetti at a wedding in private.

[coxswain]

I agree! I've heard what Cruise Critic has said so far via post from the Community Manager and the Publisher of Cruise Critic. I'd LOVE to hear what RCI has to say.

 

 

Thank you - we await the statements - lets hope both step up to the plate !!

 

 

 

 

jj......

[cruisinMike]

deleted

[cassieroll]

Yep, we are the rats, and I do hope someone is working on a paper.

 

Jaxon -- Royal Chump, charter member

LOL! Maybe there's hope for the chumps yet!

[jaxon41]

"And I still find it incredible that not one RC is offended by RCL's manipulation of them. That they were being used to to sway unwitting CC members.

 

Could it be, just positing here as I do not know how sophisitcated data mining operations are, that the folks chosen show an inclination NOT to be capable of that awareness, or in the converse, the folks that make an initial selection are whittled by something that shows they can catch on quite quickly to such subtlety? Of all the many, many positive posters on this board, if the criteria was just high postive post counts, you would have a group a heck of a lot larger than 40.

[SargassoPirate]

Last night I took a look at that eyefortravel social media conference that Laura attended. Interesting stuff, all about how to "exploit", actually their word, the social media for money -- monetizing, they call it. There was only one subtopic in a discussion group which I found that purported to talk about what to do when it blows up in your face and harms your brand.

 

I think eyeontravel could stand to invite some folks like you to their next conference -- maybe have Hazence give a paper on this -- maybe hire Ephraim to do a data mining analysis on this thread. I am sure in the viral marketing world this will become the classic study, as some writers say this is the first time THIS type of viral marketing has been done (not sure I am believing that, but I have read it several times). With headlines like -- Viral Marketing Sinks Cruise Critic -- you know the industry has to be watching.

 

I didn't properly identify my link to an earlier article I quoted on here in my bookmarks, so can't readily link it again. But it was from a travel writer who had reported on these conferences over a year ago, and writes about those in the travel industry who walked out, appalled at what they were seeing and hearing, and he goes on to say he asked why there weren't sessions on how the travel industry could use social networking to help them improve their brand, but they weren't interested.

 

Is this it?

 

http://events.eyefortravel.com/social-media/agenda.asp

[Bakincakes]

If what Cecilia says is true it seems that CC entered into a contract with the "devil".:(

 

RCI used their clout in order to infiltrate this board and probably counted on CC trusting that what they were doing was above board.

 

Where did RCI get the names they requested if not from this site? Someone above posted that RCI got the names "elsewhere".:confused:

 

Obviously RCs talked about the perks they were getting. I've seen threads describing them and have seen posters ask how they were invited. Almost to a poster the answer was "I don't know why they picked me". Obviously they didn't care much of the how or they may have pressed RCI for their criteria. All they knew is that they were one of the "chosen". Happy Day!!!

 

If CC had no idea what they were getting into..shame on them for being on concert with RCI without knowing exactly why RCI wanted those names. If CC GAVE those addys to RCI they were wrong to do so without knowing what RCI wanted and why.

 

If RCI deliberately played on their clout and got CC to act and kept them in the dark, shame on them. They used this site and the members of it. Those that were chosen may not feel used but those that weren't have certainly said that they are now suspect of posts made by RCs and CC Admins.

 

I take it that CC has worked hard to build up the trust of those that post here. Certainly many people have gained by being members as good advice does abound. But others may now question the motivation of RCI cheerleaders, in the future.

 

I do think that CC needs to answer how they will handle situations like this in the future. I also think that RCI OWES CC and its membership a true explanation and not some corporate double speak.

[hazence]

I would like to know what "fake facts" those posting objection to this marketing infiltration are posting?

 

Is it a fake fact that RCCL Loyalty Manager made the referenced statements at a Marketing conference.? RCCL has not denied them ...only regretted them. (BIG difference) I doubt they can DENY what was said in a large public venue like that. Why don't they post a copy of her remarks or link to the video? Many conference presentations are videoed. We will see who is "lying."

 

Is it a "fake fact" that RCCL stated posts here are monitored to see if the desired effect of viral marketing is being achieved here? Now someone is "monitoring" on company time...i.e. being paid to do so. In a time of cutbacks, someone at RCCl thinks monitoring this Board is important...else they could put that money toward...chocolates! (little levity here, folks)

 

Is it a "fake fact" that an elite group was formed and rewarded and given a certain status to give them more importance. They were the Champs. Is it a "fake fact" RCCL said the purpose of this was to "influence THAT CHAMP group so they would influence the rest of us." (we are The Chumps)

 

Now, does CC claim that the formation of this elite group did not IN ANY WAY effect their Boards? If the possibility of free cruises, special status, special invitations did not make some POST IN A FASHION that might get them all that good stuff too? Marketing experts and pyschologists would differ with you I believe. Go to any high school and observe the pecking order that forms around the Prom Queen and Football captain...

 

Please tell us what "fake facts"we are espousing so we may cease and desist. I want to correct any false assertion I am making. Please be specific....that will help me improve.

 

And to the poster that I believe was referring to MY presence on this thread....I'll be happy to explain the psychology around it. I am a long time reader and admirer of this site. I never much cared to post...made one or two posts a month or so ago. The other day, I made a few posts because I had an opinion on this viral marketing topic. I was immediately jumped by a Champ who attempted to discredit me because I was new to posting. He had been one of my favorites. Over and over the Champs tried to dismiss questions with a "jealous" smear.Of course, I had seen this before...but NOW, I was experiencing it first hand. It made me more and more determined NOT to run away, or be intimidated, or afraid to speak my piece.

 

I think that tendency to bully and swarm anyone who questions RCCL diminishes this great Board. I think THAT tendency was exacerbated by the experiment conducted here of creating 2 classes of posters with no discernable criteria. The open quality that all posts of any nature are respected here should be the foundation of a "Cruise critic" board.

 

I think this viral marketing infiltration has infected the tolerance and civility of this Board. This is too good aplace to permit that to continue...even if it is JUST what RCCL marketing is hoping for!

[jaxon41]

.

 

No one and I mean no one has ever been offered a gift to post anything. No one was ever told what to post. It was looked at as a "thank you" from a cruiseline. Something special like a plate of fruit in your cabin - nothing more.

 

He said, she said, they said - whatever. The truth is simple and has been stated over and over.

 

Just my personal opinion here (not that of CC) - it seems that this has blown way out of per portion. Some of you that are coming out of left field with these allegations and assumptions have never paid any attention to the RCCL board before.

 

Boy oh boy -- here we go again. Yes, the charter RC's just looked at the compensation of a pre-inaugural cruise as a thank you for having posted so frequently about the line in a positive manner. But that IS NOT what the discussion is about -- not to any of us who are not into trying to put down RC's or those who have questions/concerns about viral marketing, and the use of it here.

 

If the people running the joint think this is about nothing more than a plate a fruit, they are in deeper trouble than I thought. Man the hatches, because the ship is taking on a lot of water!

 

Jaxon -- viralated Royal Chump, charter member

[jaxon41]

Good post.

agree

[BayStateguppy]

"And I still find it incredible that not one RC is offended by RCL's manipulation of them. That they were being used to to sway unwitting CC members.

 

Could it be, just positing here as I do not know how sophisitcated data mining operations are, that the folks chosen show an inclination NOT to be capable of that awareness, or in the converse, the folks that make an initial selection are whittled by something that shows they can catch on quite quickly to such subtlety? Of all the many, many positive posters on this board, if the criteria was just high postive post counts, you would have a group a heck of a lot larger than 40.

 

 

jaxon, I am sure that a lot of time and energy was spent in choosing the RCs and that psychological profiles were screened to ensure the more easily manipulated were among the chosen.

But again, after learning they were manipulated, still no RCs are shocked? outraged? offended? Apparently they had no idea what RCL intended when including them into the club and gave them free cruises. So now that they know, aren't they just a little bit mad? RCs' post were being monitored for frequency and positivity ! They were being watched! They were expected to sway fellow CC members! .... The silence is deafening.