Royal Champions

[xpcdoojk]

When are we going to get past a bad blogger? That is the basis of this garbage. Garbage in garbage out. When you quote garbage what does that make your statements?

 

jc

[kaylorcc]

 

I was fully prepared to be rick-rolled. I'm a little disappointed now, actually. Heh.

[coxswain]

When are we going to get past a bad blogger?

 

 

Well done the blogger - he/she deserves a free 2nite cruise lol

 

 

 

 

 

jj......

[BecciBoo]

 

little people?????????

 

 

what exactly does that mean may I ask?

 

 

RCCL and CC likes the RC's they have representing them to add insult to injury??

 

 

some of you really need to think before you open your mouths

 

 

And some of you people need to use your gray matter before you open your mouths, she was replying in kind to another poster who asked the question and referred to herself as "the rest of us little people". As an english speaking person, are you familiar with the term "Sarcasm"??? Geesh!!!:rolleyes:

 

And who in the heck is Brenda Moran???

[bilyclub]

I was fully prepared to be rick-rolled. I'm a little disappointed now, actually. Heh.

 

 

Thats close to what the wive says.............all the time.

[Micki Dee]

When are we going to get past a bad blogger? That is the basis of this garbage. Garbage in garbage out. When you quote garbage what does that make your statements?

 

jc

 

 

If that was directed at me, sorry if my post made you angry. I was merely amused by the Spartacus video. It happens to be one of my favorite quotes and it added just a tad bit of humor to this otherwise bitter thread.

 

I should have clarified myself on my other post.

 

Man, everybody is just mad at everybody over here.

[cruzendude]

Okay, sure, I'll happily score myself an internet point, and concede one to you. For the purposes of this thread, though, this is the definition I think fits best:

 

"placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric."

 

You've never read a review where the author did not go out of their way to compare their experience to another line, for example? On the flip side, I've read reviews from RCs that were so entirely sugar-coated that it was hard for me to take them at all seriously. The latter is clear bias, you just want to argue semantics.

 

 

No, you get no points! Apparently I need to draw you a picture so here goes....

 

Someone writes what appears to be a non sugarcoated well balanced review....you with me so far?

 

You read how they loved their cabin and they stated this was the best cabin they have ever sailed in...still with me?

 

So you naturally deduct that this may be a very nice cabin to book on your next cruise......

 

BUT what you don't know is that this person is 6'6" tall and the bed was a little longer so it was the best ever for this cruiser but he didn't go into detail as to why he loved the cabin, only that he did. You book it based on his BIASES and hate it cause the long bed takes up too much room in your cabin.....I didn't lose you did I?

 

So hopefully now you can see how ones OPINION is biased, at first I thought the actual definition would clear things up for you but I obviously was wrong so hopefully this little internet "picture" will clear things up! :rolleyes:

[spongerob]

I would hardly call a fuzzbuzz on Cruise Critic a "PR disaster" for RCI. We often flatter ourselves that we represent the cruising public, but I would bet (and I've read, but I can't remember where, and I don't know if it's true) that we are less than 1% of the cruising public. I think this is a tempest in a teapot to the rest of the world.

 

10 people have contributed 50% of the posts to this thread. (388 of 777 at the time I looked). Tempest in a teacup is a better analogy. But it sure is entertaining.

[Ocean Boy]

I was just reading a very interesting thread about the RCCL stock going up in price and guess what two people are over there looking?

Even want to know how many shares needed to get the discount?

 

I don't think you are that all that worried. :D

 

I wonder if the shares are up because the R.C.ers were having a really busy day on the boards talking up RCI?;):D

[cruzendude]

 

 

little people?????????

 

 

what exactly does that mean may I ask?

 

 

RCCL and CC likes the RC's they have representing them to add insult to injury??

 

 

some of you really need to think before you open your mouths

 

 

 

And some of you people need to use your gray matter before you open your mouths, she was replying in kind to another poster who asked the question and referred to herself as "the rest of us little people". As an english speaking person, are you familiar with the term "Sarcasm"??? Geesh!!!:rolleyes:

 

And who in the heck is Brenda Moran???

 

 

Just Google her, on second thought you may not want to! :eek:

[jaxon41]

Read this Jaxon41 http://www.techipedia.com/2009/brand-evangelists-royal-caribbean/

 

 

"The right kind of brand ambassador program does not necessarily demand forum participation thereafter, though they encourage it with a full disclosure of the participation."

 

 

jj......

 

 

And therein lies the rub, doesn't it, the ethical rub, and potentially, the legal one. Thanks for the link -- love learning new things. Well, they wanted viral, and it appears they got it.

 

So the new question becomes: Did RCCL tell it's viral marketers that they needed to disclose? When and how?

Did they tell CC that it needed to disclose as a facilitator of the viral marketing campaign? Is there any potential liability for affirmative acts of preventing disclosure/awareness (other than what is going on right now in the ethernet)?

 

Harkening back to the fuel surcharge fight, I recall those who said -- well, RCCL has this big legal team, so they must have decided that everything was lawful, so you are whistling dixey writing the AG, and screaming breach of contract. I tried to explain reality to them -- that business (financial) legal advice may or may not bear any relation to what is lawful. It often comes down to the benefit of an unlawful or unethical act vs the cost of legal enforcement against the company. Just a personal aside, naivete and rose colored glasses has gotten this nation and the world into a horrendous situation, and I am afraid, I have precious little patience with it, anymore.

[coxswain]

Jaxon41 never give up !!

 

 

 

 

 

jj......

[nanfromatlanta]

 

little people?????????

 

 

what exactly does that mean may I ask?

 

 

RCCL and CC likes the RC's they have representing them to add insult to injury??

 

 

some of you really need to think before you open your mouths

 

 

And some of you people need to use your gray matter before you open your mouths, she was replying in kind to another poster who asked the question and referred to herself as "the rest of us little people". As an english speaking person, are you familiar with the term "Sarcasm"??? Geesh!!!:rolleyes:

 

And who in the heck is Brenda Moran???

 

YIKES Becci, you don't want to open that can of worms!!! :eek:

[ranquet91]

Noticed this article on MSNBC....

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29554810/

 

*Edit* Just noticed this topic is being discussed in the top sticky thread.

[TEXASMUNK]

and this article from the cable station that had one commentator say that one particular poltical candidate "gave him tingles up his leg"

 

If only the Royal Champions were the evil, vile villians that they are portrayed to be....using the anti- Royal Champion logic...they would never post again, they would all be on free RCI cruises.

 

PS...I am one!

[BecciBoo]

I just went and read everything I could find about it and it strikes me as completely weird that I have over 5000 posts here and I never heard about it or read about it...at all...in over 4 years as a member! THerefore, making RCs be responsible for what happened to this woman is totally ludicrous. But I couldn't of course, find out who the people are who are supposed to have complained about her. In my mind, I'm sure it was those who typically find fault on these boards. But those are not any of the RCs I met and know. I did find some articles about the incident that said that she made a habit of going from one cruise line to the next making all sorts of complaints to see how much compensation she could get. If that was her MO I don't see the problem in RCCL ridding themselves of a potential problem cruiser. But then that's just me. Oops was that a can I opened?? Just ignore me. That's the simple way to fix it, right?;)

[cruzendude]

And some of you people need to use your gray matter before you open your mouths, she was replying in kind to another poster who asked the question and referred to herself as "the rest of us little people". As an english speaking person, are you familiar with the term "Sarcasm"??? Geesh!!!:rolleyes:

 

And who in the heck is Brenda Moran???

 

YIKES Becci, you don't want to open that can of worms!!! :eek:

 

Is there a Brenda Moran fan club??? :confused:

[xpcdoojk]

If that was directed at me, sorry if my post made you angry. I was merely amused by the Spartacus video. It happens to be one of my favorite quotes and it added just a tad bit of humor to this otherwise bitter thread.

 

I should have clarified myself on my other post.

 

Man, everybody is just mad at everybody over here.

 

Nope not directed at you. It is all good between us.:)

 

jc

[Micki Dee]

Nope not directed at you. It is all good between us.:)

 

jc

 

Thanks for clarifying.:) The last thing I want to do is get hit by friendly fire.;)

[ranquet91]

and this article from the cable station that had one commentator say that one particular poltical candidate "gave him tingles up his leg"

 

If only the Royal Champions were the evil, vile villians that they are portrayed to be....using the anti- Royal Champion logic...they would never post again, they would all be on free RCI cruises.

 

PS...I am one!

 

I cannot speak for the validility of any one news source nor am I saying Royal Champions are evil. I have always appreciated the wonderful information from CC members and the Champions. If, however, this article is fact it is sad to see that the wonderful information we receive is paid sugarcoating. Now I also realize that many members personally denote themselves as "Royal Champions" due to their board senority and amount of cruises taken with RCL. This article I believe relates to RCL'S handpicked and paid "Royal Champions"

[xpcdoojk]

Is there a Brenda Moran fan club??? :confused:

 

Most definitely! They are the ones that think an anonymous internet forum, must have identifying signs because they have their signatures turned off, or they think that posting on the internet is like standing up in a council meeting in their village. You can identify them easily just look for the pitchforks and flaming torches as they burn down the castle.

 

jc

 

Hi Spongey! Princess forum sucking today?:D

[TEXASMUNK]

Speaking solely for myself....guess the check is in the mail..ain't got nuttin yet!

And every opinion I express..is mine, untainted, unvarnished, but honest!!!

[xpcdoojk]

It just goes to show you that even all of the news fit to print isn't fit to be read.

 

Garbage.

 

Enjoy getting sucked in, but don't say you were not warned.

 

jc<---- not a royal champion therefore no one can doubt what I say:D

[TEXASMUNK]

How come your posts make me think?

 

LOL

 

Always appreciate your thoughts!

[FL_Cruiser64]

I do not believe that is true. There are many, many people on here who are dear friends of the original Royal Champions and were not picked. And, they are true assets to the Cruise Critic boards.

To say that is putting the original Charter Royal Champions backed into a corner.

Unless that can be proven, you are opening up another can of worms they will have to deny. :eek:

That is going off in another direction again.

None of them has ever said that to my knowledge.

 

a) I didn't say every member gets to pick. What if it is only a handfull of 'original RCs'? We don't know exactly how many. If you read my post you will see that the 'charter members' are not the 'charter members' but merely the first group to go to an official event.

 

b) so what if I opened up a can of worms. It certainly does make the most sense. The question though is: what do I base that on? Could just be an invention of my sick little mind. I tend to do that. Though most of those sick inventions became reality. How about 35% information, 35% observation and 30% a logical conclusion based on the former two?

I may though put out a disclaimer: information may not come from 'Adam', 'Adam G', Mr Goldstein. I have not met this man, never talked to him and I have no photo op to proof that. :D

 

And why should my statement put any 'charter member' in the corner? Is a title that important? Statements like this is like walking the slippery slope. In a way RCs want no criticism, yet they are trying to lift themselves above and even within yet nobody actually can tell why they are RC charter members in the first place.

 

True assets to CC? Maybe so. But just because of a designation? Isn't that the point of this discussion? Why is someone with a couple hundred posts an asset (charter or not) just based on a designation or a title then someone who has posted 10,000 valuable posts?