Current Dress Code and Formal Night

[wentworth]

Personal attacks are unwarranted. Please cease. One must be careful using the word "you".

 

Responding directly to your inquiry' date=' that's not what I said at all. Sometimes one only sees what one wants to see. And---once again---for those who have trouble comprehending what they read, it isn't about Carnival's relaxed dress code, it's about what is - or is not - appropriate.[/quote']

 

 

One is not getting the message:rolleyes: One refuses to get the point. One

needs to understand that not appropriate to one may be appropriate

to another. One cannot be the judge. Carnival set the dress code and

evidently they think it is appropriate. If one wants to they can send

the two definitions to Carnival. I already know them.

[Kurbanfan]

Carnival sets a standard with its dress code and its enforcement of it. Allowing jeans and shorts in the dining room is the standard that they set, if they forbid these items in the dining room, then wearing them would be inappropriate.

 

 

MAC

 

Pretty cut and dry:D

[Kurbanfan]

Which little games? It is ACCEPTABLE on Carnival in the dining room on casual night.... That doesn't mean it's APPROPRIATE.

 

Many are unable to discern the difference between those two words.

 

If they are clearly listed in the dress code as being allowed ........they are appropriate for that setting.

Not sure about you but if I received an invitation to a party/dinner and they list the dress code and I chose to dress accordingly to that specific dress code I would certainly say that would be appropriate.

 

But then again, a few might be unable to discern this;)

[bakechef]

Pretty cut and dry:D

 

Why do I let myself get sucked in to these threads, will I ever learn?:D

 

MAC

[BallFour4]

Wherever the post was that said attire does not equal class I say BRAVO to that cruiser. I want them at my table on our next cruise :)

 

 

Simply stated:

 

"You can put lipstick on a pig. When you are done it's still a pig" :D

 

Shorts and jeans are in the dress guidelines now. Move on.

[rphx2nc]

How's this?

 

"What was he wearing? Well, uh, let's see, he was wearing a red argyle sweater, and tan trousers, and red shoes... No, he's not retarded."

 

What movie is this from? Sorry, made me laugh.

[Mark]

I think the point that some of you are missing is that the Carnival Corp owns those ships and runs their cruise line their own way and such they have the right to establish any guidelines they see fit for use of their dining rooms...if any of us do not like their guidlelines we have the choice of cruising on another line with guidelines more in line with our personal tastes.

[dfishner]

Think the Carnival dress policy is easy to understand and glad I no longer need to bring a suit or sport coat. I will be on the Liberty in November less both. I frankly do not care what others cruisers are wearing it does not take away from us enjoying our cruise.

 

We made a decision a few years ago not to bring any dress clothes but to go casual, meaning long pants and a nice shirt for dinner. We did this on RCL, Princess with no problem. When they had a formal night we would generally go to the speciality restaurants on those nights. It is nice to know we can go to the dining room on formal or whatever Carnival is calling it in dress pants and a nice shirt. We would not wear shorts in the dining room for dinner but that is just us, we do not care if others do. For us this policy creates a more casual and relaxed feeling and we are all for that.

[Kurbanfan]

Why do I let myself get sucked in to these threads, will I ever learn?:D

 

MAC

 

You and me both Mac:D You and me both.......

[trock]

You and me both Mac:D You and me both.......

Count me in too.. Same with the smoking threads...

There are those who want to quote Carnival's Rules when they are agree with their thinking and then when the rules do not suit them they get dramatic...

Why oh why do we get into it?

[Kurbanfan]

There are those who want to quote Carnival's Rules when they are agree with their thinking and then when the rules do not suit them they get dramatic...

Why oh why do we get into it?

 

Too funny! I was going to post exactly that.......but I knew I would get a post back saying.......What? I know Carnival allows it. I know it is clearly written in the dress code..... But it is still not appropriate.

 

It is just getting too exhausting:D

[trock]

Too funny! I was going to post exactly that.......but I knew I would get a post back saying.......What? I know Carnival allows it. I know it is clearly written in the dress code..... But it is still not appropriate.

 

It is just getting too exhausting:D

LOL

I just don't understand why some posters simply cannot say we disagree on this, but agree we love cruising or something to that fact...

Arent we all here because we share that common ground?

 

Quite honestly if someone's dress intefered with my good time, I would say I have more issues than the other person.. Now I may have issues.. but I simply try to leave them home while on a cruise :p

 

If its appropriate to Carnival.. that is all we need to know!

If Carnival allows smoking in two or three areas of a massive ship- then those are the rules.. I follow them according to Carnival and no one else.

Because ultimately I am paying Carnival, not some self-righteous poster on Cruise Critic... If and when the day comes that smoking is completely against the rules.. then I may rethink where I spend my money (unless I quit by then which I would love to do!)

[Kurbanfan]

LOL

I just don't understand why some posters simply cannot say we disagree on this, but agree we love cruising or something to that fact...

Arent we all here because we share that common ground?

 

Quite honestly if someone's dress intefered with my good time, I would say I have more issues than the other person.. Now I may have issues.. but I simply try to leave them home while on a cruise :p

 

If its appropriate to Carnival.. that is all we need to know!

If Carnival allows smoking in two or three areas of a massive ship- then those are the rules.. I follow them according to Carnival and no one else.

Because ultimately I am paying Carnival, not some self-righteous poster on Cruise Critic... If and when the day comes that smoking is completely against the rules.. then I may rethink where I spend my money (unless I quit by then which I would love to do!)

 

Agreed!

Like you said in another thread....."Cruising is a choice too, its not just your right":)

[G'ma]

Carnival sets a standard with its dress code and its enforcement of it. Allowing jeans and shorts in the dining room is the standard that they set, if they forbid these items in the dining room, then wearing them would be inappropriate. How can you not wrap your head around that?

 

You obviously feel that Carnival dining rooms are the pinnacle of formal dining, but they are not. Many of the cafes that I go to have table cloths and cloth napkins and metal flatware, they are not in any way formal. The dining room on the Carnival Glory resembled and oriental space ship more than an upscale dining venue, and the singing and dancing waiters didn't add much to the formal feel.

 

Using the word "one" to refer to others over and over in your posts doesn't make you sound more dignified or refined, but instead pompous.

 

MAC

 

Once again, there is a failure to comprehend the written word. My comments are NOT about Carnival's dress code policy, but, rather, the difference between "acceptable" and "appropriate".

 

As for the comments on my language choices, I am, like many others on this forum, a fully literate adult with a great command of the English language. I find those who are literate and well versed can usually get their point across without insults, without using offensive language and without aggression.

[G'ma]

ap·pro·pri·ate [ ə prṓpree ət ]

 

adjective Definition: fitting: suitable for the occasion or circumstances

 

No gray area? How much experience do you actually have in analyzing words and language? Not much I can gather from your statements of certainty. All language is inherently ambiguous.

 

Providing a definition does not answer my issue. I am not concerned with the definition. A definition is merely defining a term by the use of other terms. If the underlying terms have ambiguity, then the term itself is ambiguous.

 

Your definition of "appropriate" only tells me that it means "fitting" and "suitable for the occassion or circumstances".

 

But who determines "fitting" and who determines "suitability"? If two people have different views on fitting and suitability, then "appropriate" takes on two different meanings. Hence, I am correct that the word essentially means nothing unless the relevant parties share the same values and agree on what is appropriate.

 

 

 

I suppose your reasoning could apply to almost any word. Right, wrong, good, bad, criminal, law abiding, moral, immoral, amoral. Words are life and interpretation is often in the eyes of the beholder. However, some truths are simply true and nothing else.

 

Language is not all that ambiguous except for certain Arabic or Chinese dialects where insinuation and misdirection are part of the culture.

 

I shall enjoy my cruise experience in any case. I will enjoy seeing those who are dressed appropriate to the occasion and will enjoy doing so myself.

 

I shall, as always, ignore the Clampetts.

[Cruise, J.D.]

I suppose your reasoning could apply to almost any word. Right' date=' wrong, good, bad, criminal, law abiding, moral, immoral, amoral. Words are life and interpretation is often in the eyes of the beholder. However, some truths are simply true and nothing else.

[/quote']

 

Yes it does apply. For some principles, society has attempted to remove ambiguity by establishing an official "appropriateness" (i.e., the law). Acts not unlawful depend on subjective views for appropriateness. This is why there are different cultures even within the same country. There is a lot of room within the law for groups to establish their own standards of behavior. One group does not own the meaning of appropriate.

 

Carnival has a dress code to resolve some ambiguity on appropriateness. Anything outside the dress code relies on mere opinion of appropriateness.

 

There can never really be an objective appropriateness for dress. Standards of appropriateness regarding dress change from one generation to the next and from one culture to the next. If there was a fixed definition, then why has fashion changed so much over time? Those from earlier times would surely think modern dress "inappropriate". Who gets to set the definition and how far back in time do you go to set the definition? I am thankful that past generations were not able to set the definition of appropriate dress for all time.

 

It is easy to grasp that all language has inherent ambiguity. Even a child understands the concept. I guess you have never had a situation where you said something and the person misinterpreted your meaning? Supposing both of you gave the same words different meanings based on different denotations of the words, who was wrong?

[dan40]

Yes it does apply. For some principles, society has attempted to remove ambiguity by establishing an official "appropriateness" (i.e., the law). Acts not unlawful depend on subjective views for appropriateness. This is why there are different cultures even within the same country. There is a lot of room within the law for groups to establish their own standards of behavior. One group does not own the meaning of appropriate.

 

Carnival has a dress code to resolve some ambiguity on appropriateness. Anything outside the dress code relies on mere opinion of appropriateness.

 

There can never really be an objective appropriateness for dress. Standards of appropriateness regarding dress change from one generation to the next and from one culture to the next. If there was a fixed definition, then why has fashion changed so much over time? Those from earlier times would surely think modern dress "inappropriate". Who gets to set the definition and how far back in time do you go to set the definition? I am thankful that past generations were not able to set the definition of appropriate dress for all time.

 

It is easy to grasp that all language has inherent ambiguity. Even a child understands the concept. I guess you have never had a situation where you said something and the person misinterpreted your meaning? Supposing both of you gave the same words different meanings based on different denotations of the words, who was wrong?

 

Euwww! Thank you. But my head hurts now. Is that appropriate?:p:D

 

Dan

[Cruise, J.D.]

Euwww! Thank you. But my head hurts now. Is that appropriate?:p:D

 

Dan

 

LOL. I don't think it is appropriate the amount of time I have wasted on this thread. :)

[ajmac01]

WOW! It is truely amazing how heated some of these topics can get from a simple question.

 

All this has made me think of a dream I had arguing with my 12 yr old DS about what was OK to wear to formal night. While the rest of us (DW, DD(15) and myself where dressed in to the T, DS comes out wearing cargo shorts and ratty Red Sox t-shirt that he always seems to have on:eek: Alarm went off so I don't know the final out come. But had a dream a few days later he was wearing the same clothes as we where clearing the snow of the car at the airport:( He would wear shorts and t-shirts all year with no jacket if we let him.

[ajmac01]

Oh ya, I meant to ask if it's OK to remove my tips from my S&S:D , Just kidding.

[G'ma]

Yes it does apply. For some principles, society has attempted to remove ambiguity by establishing an official "appropriateness" (i.e., the law). Acts not unlawful depend on subjective views for appropriateness. This is why there are different cultures even within the same country. There is a lot of room within the law for groups to establish their own standards of behavior. One group does not own the meaning of appropriate.

 

Carnival has a dress code to resolve some ambiguity on appropriateness. Anything outside the dress code relies on mere opinion of appropriateness.

 

There can never really be an objective appropriateness for dress. Standards of appropriateness regarding dress change from one generation to the next and from one culture to the next. If there was a fixed definition, then why has fashion changed so much over time? Those from earlier times would surely think modern dress "inappropriate". Who gets to set the definition and how far back in time do you go to set the definition? I am thankful that past generations were not able to set the definition of appropriate dress for all time.

 

It is easy to grasp that all language has inherent ambiguity. Even a child understands the concept. I guess you have never had a situation where you said something and the person misinterpreted your meaning? Supposing both of you gave the same words different meanings based on different denotations of the words, who was wrong?

 

Rarely do I say something that is misinterpreted by the listener. Sometimes, it's true, the listener doesn't actually listen but only hears. That is the fault of the person hearing, not the one "saying".

 

There is actually no such thing as "different" denotations. The word itself refers to the literal translation. Again, if there is a misinterpretation, it is by the listener......

 

Shall we put our dictionaries away and simply say that in our current society, there are those who feel quite comfortable puttering around their own little circle in Podunkville or Gotham City and are immune to the idea that there is a time and place for everything.

 

Happy cruising......

[Cruise, J.D.]

There is actually no such thing as "different" denotations. The word itself refers to the literal translation. Again' date=' if there is a misinterpretation, it is by the listener......

 

[/quote']

 

That is wrong. Many words are often listed with two or more denotations in a dictionary, both in common use. That is in addition to any connotative meanings to the words. The word "good" has 58 meanings listed. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/good. Are you saying that "good" does not have two or more obvious denotative meanings? "Good" is often defined in the law as an article of personal property. This is by definition a denotative meaning since it is defined.

 

The original meaning of "vulgar"? is "the general public". Is that the denotative meaning? If you used the word "vulgar", how would you expect the listener to intrepret it?

 

This ignores the arguability of whether denotative meaning actually exists and the use of idioms that take two or more words and combine them for a denotative meaning outside the underlying words.

 

I thought you would appreciate this link on semiotics for beginners. http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/S4B/sem06.html

[Cigar Dude]

LOL! This thread will never die!

 

 

So, have we come to a decision on what is allowed in the dining room yet? :D :D :D

[Kurbanfan]

LOL! This thread will never die!

 

 

So, have we come to a decision on what is allowed in the dining room yet? :D :D :D

 

Probably anything that gets by the Maitre di........but I do know what's appropriate:D

[trock]

Everone should show up naked to avoid what is acceptible or not

:p