GGC2005 - Pre-Vote Announcement!!!

And you might be right.

But the voting will be in public, here and in the ggc0000 yahoo group
for all that want to see. Feel free to count along...

Lloyd

In article WY5vc.1840$CW.353@lakeread05, Freddyp
wrote:

One of my first posts was that asshole belin was going to get it........Just
watch



"Mike Cordelli" wrote in message
m...
I'd prefer to wait for the secret vote where you decide everything.


"Judy O'Connor" wrote in message
...
So I take it you are accepting the chairmanship?

Judy ---In Mike's own mind he's right

Mike Cordelli wrote:

I guarantee you if I was committee chariman I wouldn't change the rules
mid
stream without telling anybody.

Please indicate when you as the committee posted the change in the
rules
after the February post when you said you were not changing them? If
I'm
wrong and it was posted, I will be the first to apologize for my
remarks.
You posted at least a hundred times you were accepting bids and the
rest,
funny how the change in the rules never made it.

Maybe, just maybe, if you did things up front and on the up and up,
there
wouldn't be so much fingerpointing and bitching and the rest.

By the way, HTML has no place in newsgroups.

I love the way the committee is now circling the wagons to protect
their
own.




"Judy O'Connor" wrote in message
...
Mike, next year you can be committee chairman. I nominate you as of
now.
Then you can listen to all the bitching and whining and
finger-pointing.
I
don't care what anybody thinks, we on the committee know what went on.
If
any of you, and I mean any, had volunteered for this committee, you
would
be
able to see we did not do anything underhanded, we didn't hide anything
from
anyone. We chose to change the RFB to allow more people to bid and
sadly
not many did.

I know, in your own mind you see it differently.


Judy----Waiting to see how Mike Cordelli does next year as committee
chairman

Mike Cordelli wrote:

You guys are totally cracking me up.

Lets take a step back to, Oh, I don't know, February 2.

The following was posted he

-----start
The current requirements for bidding are :

1. Be a participating member in RTC
2. Be a full-time travel agent
3. Be owner, principal or can get permission to commit the agency to a
contract.

I do not think those will change as the committee seems to be in
agreement
on those items.
-----end

See that last line? The part about "I do not think these will change
as
the
committee seems to be in agreement on those items? Now the committee
comes
back to the group and says it's the fault of the people they didn't ask
for
the "new" terms after they (the committee) stated they would not
change?

Give it a rest, you used the rules to control the number of people who
would
be eligible. Then you changed the rules to get people who wouldn't
have
been eligible under the old rules be allowed to bid, but kept it a
secret
to
control the bidding process.

All you guys had to do was post the new rules when you changed them,
after
saying they wouldn't change. You kept it a secret so people who
couldn't
bid under the rules would be able to bid. Plain and simple.

It's been quite entertaining to watch all the back and forth, just come
out
and say you were controlling who would and wouldn't be allowed to bid
by
having over restrictive rules up front, thus limiting the number of
people
who thought they would qualify, then changing it without telling
anybody
because "We Tulsans are proud of Tulsa and are protective of each
other!"

It's no huge deal, just admit you changed the rules to allow a bid that
wouldn't have been allowed in, you just forgot to tell anybody. The
rules
were of course silly to start with, but that's another issue.




"SC posner" wrote in message
om...

If anyone was really interested they could have asked for a copy of the
"new" RFB. I would have gladly sent them a copy.

If I remember correctly, very few copies were asked for. All that
asked
received a copy. Not all the TA's that asked for the RFB submitted
bids.
But we were fortunate that 4 TA's saw the RFB and took the time to bid.

Chip

Just show the post when they announced the change in the rules opening it up
to people who wouldn't have qualified. Show that post, and the conversation
is over. That proves it wasn't a hidden decision, that we all just missed
it. Simple.




"Charles" wrote in message
d...
In article , Judy O'Connor
wrote:

So I take it you are accepting the chairmanship?

Judy ---In Mike's own mind he's right

What Mike has posted on this seems on the mark to me. I think he is
right and probably many others think Mike is right.

--
Charles

Mike,
Are you going to vote? If you do, would you go on the cruise you voted for?

as far as you waiting for the secret vote to decide everything ....

I know what I would vote ... But just like everyone else, I only have one
vote!

Chip

"Mike Cordelli" wrote in message
m...
I'd prefer to wait for the secret vote where you decide everything.


"Judy O'Connor" wrote in message
...
So I take it you are accepting the chairmanship?

Judy ---In Mike's own mind he's right

Mike Cordelli wrote:

I guarantee you if I was committee chariman I wouldn't change the rules
mid
stream without telling anybody.

Please indicate when you as the committee posted the change in the
rules
after the February post when you said you were not changing them? If
I'm
wrong and it was posted, I will be the first to apologize for my
remarks.
You posted at least a hundred times you were accepting bids and the
rest,
funny how the change in the rules never made it.

Maybe, just maybe, if you did things up front and on the up and up,
there
wouldn't be so much fingerpointing and bitching and the rest.

By the way, HTML has no place in newsgroups.

I love the way the committee is now circling the wagons to protect
their
own.




"Judy O'Connor" wrote in message
...
Mike, next year you can be committee chairman. I nominate you as of
now.
Then you can listen to all the bitching and whining and
finger-pointing.
I
don't care what anybody thinks, we on the committee know what went on.
If
any of you, and I mean any, had volunteered for this committee, you
would
be
able to see we did not do anything underhanded, we didn't hide anything
from
anyone. We chose to change the RFB to allow more people to bid and
sadly
not many did.

I know, in your own mind you see it differently.


Judy----Waiting to see how Mike Cordelli does next year as committee
chairman

Mike Cordelli wrote:

You guys are totally cracking me up.

Lets take a step back to, Oh, I don't know, February 2.

The following was posted he

-----start
The current requirements for bidding are :

1. Be a participating member in RTC
2. Be a full-time travel agent
3. Be owner, principal or can get permission to commit the agency to a
contract.

I do not think those will change as the committee seems to be in
agreement
on those items.
-----end

See that last line? The part about "I do not think these will change
as
the
committee seems to be in agreement on those items? Now the committee
comes
back to the group and says it's the fault of the people they didn't ask
for
the "new" terms after they (the committee) stated they would not
change?

Give it a rest, you used the rules to control the number of people who
would
be eligible. Then you changed the rules to get people who wouldn't
have
been eligible under the old rules be allowed to bid, but kept it a
secret
to
control the bidding process.

All you guys had to do was post the new rules when you changed them,
after
saying they wouldn't change. You kept it a secret so people who
couldn't
bid under the rules would be able to bid. Plain and simple.

It's been quite entertaining to watch all the back and forth, just come
out
and say you were controlling who would and wouldn't be allowed to bid
by
having over restrictive rules up front, thus limiting the number of
people
who thought they would qualify, then changing it without telling
anybody
because "We Tulsans are proud of Tulsa and are protective of each
other!"

It's no huge deal, just admit you changed the rules to allow a bid that
wouldn't have been allowed in, you just forgot to tell anybody. The
rules
were of course silly to start with, but that's another issue.




"SC posner" wrote in message
om...

If anyone was really interested they could have asked for a copy of the
"new" RFB. I would have gladly sent them a copy.

If I remember correctly, very few copies were asked for. All that
asked
received a copy. Not all the TA's that asked for the RFB submitted
bids.
But we were fortunate that 4 TA's saw the RFB and took the time to bid.

Chip

Are you sure everybody only has one vote? Maybe some people have more then
one. We don't know the rules.


"SC posner" wrote in message
m...
Mike,
Are you going to vote? If you do, would you go on the cruise you voted
for?

as far as you waiting for the secret vote to decide everything ....

I know what I would vote ... But just like everyone else, I only have one
vote!

Chip

"Mike Cordelli" wrote in message
m...
I'd prefer to wait for the secret vote where you decide everything.


"Judy O'Connor" wrote in message
...
So I take it you are accepting the chairmanship?

Judy ---In Mike's own mind he's right

Mike Cordelli wrote:

I guarantee you if I was committee chariman I wouldn't change the
rules
mid
stream without telling anybody.

Please indicate when you as the committee posted the change in the
rules
after the February post when you said you were not changing them? If
I'm
wrong and it was posted, I will be the first to apologize for my
remarks.
You posted at least a hundred times you were accepting bids and the
rest,
funny how the change in the rules never made it.

Maybe, just maybe, if you did things up front and on the up and up,
there
wouldn't be so much fingerpointing and bitching and the rest.

By the way, HTML has no place in newsgroups.

I love the way the committee is now circling the wagons to protect
their
own.




"Judy O'Connor" wrote in message
...
Mike, next year you can be committee chairman. I nominate you as of
now.
Then you can listen to all the bitching and whining and
finger-pointing.
I
don't care what anybody thinks, we on the committee know what went
on.
If
any of you, and I mean any, had volunteered for this committee, you
would
be
able to see we did not do anything underhanded, we didn't hide
anything
from
anyone. We chose to change the RFB to allow more people to bid and
sadly
not many did.

I know, in your own mind you see it differently.


Judy----Waiting to see how Mike Cordelli does next year as committee
chairman

Mike Cordelli wrote:

You guys are totally cracking me up.

Lets take a step back to, Oh, I don't know, February 2.

The following was posted he

-----start
The current requirements for bidding are :

1. Be a participating member in RTC
2. Be a full-time travel agent
3. Be owner, principal or can get permission to commit the agency to
a
contract.

I do not think those will change as the committee seems to be in
agreement
on those items.
-----end

See that last line? The part about "I do not think these will change
as
the
committee seems to be in agreement on those items? Now the committee
comes
back to the group and says it's the fault of the people they didn't
ask
for
the "new" terms after they (the committee) stated they would not
change?

Give it a rest, you used the rules to control the number of people
who
would
be eligible. Then you changed the rules to get people who wouldn't
have
been eligible under the old rules be allowed to bid, but kept it a
secret
to
control the bidding process.

All you guys had to do was post the new rules when you changed them,
after
saying they wouldn't change. You kept it a secret so people who
couldn't
bid under the rules would be able to bid. Plain and simple.

It's been quite entertaining to watch all the back and forth, just
come
out
and say you were controlling who would and wouldn't be allowed to bid
by
having over restrictive rules up front, thus limiting the number of
people
who thought they would qualify, then changing it without telling
anybody
because "We Tulsans are proud of Tulsa and are protective of each
other!"

It's no huge deal, just admit you changed the rules to allow a bid
that
wouldn't have been allowed in, you just forgot to tell anybody. The
rules
were of course silly to start with, but that's another issue.




"SC posner" wrote in message
om...

If anyone was really interested they could have asked for a copy of
the
"new" RFB. I would have gladly sent them a copy.

If I remember correctly, very few copies were asked for. All that
asked
received a copy. Not all the TA's that asked for the RFB submitted
bids.
But we were fortunate that 4 TA's saw the RFB and took the time to
bid.

Chip

Mike,

Never did I say I was the owner of the agency. Don't put words in my mouth.
Also, like I said before, just because someone goes to school, doesn't mean they
cannot be a full time agent. I know a lot of people who have full time jobs and
go to night school. It is very common. I was a full time agent then and a full
time agent now. You just had a hard time comprehending that fact.

Like I said before, enough said. That's why I have not been posting on R.T.C.
for the past year or so anymore because of all the flame wars.


Mike Cordelli wrote:

I'm sorry, I had thought that in April of 2001, period of time you were not
allowed to bid that you were still in school, were not an owner of a travel
agency, and were not a full time travel agent. Obviously I'm mistaken, at
that time you were all that and were certainly slighted by not being allowed
to bid.

Again, if I'm wrong, and the post I was referring from April 11th or so of
2001 is incorrect, and you did own an agency then, and were working full
time, then I'm wrong.

Nice try though.

"John Szeto" wrote in message
...
Mike,

For the record, I am a full time agent and got permission from the agency
to
able to bind the contract for years already.

Get your facts straight. You can argue all you want. Enough said.


Mike Cordelli wrote:

No No No, he wasn't allowed to bid because he wasn't the owner or even a
full time travel agent. That was back when they had rules.

"Freddyp" wrote in message
news:Xc5vc.1832$CW.698@lakeread05...
Well now Chip

Why would you bother to post Karen's resume and not John's? A little
one
sided I would say. You do know how everyone has a thing for Mr. Szeto,
don't
you? For years he was not allowed to bid on a GGC because of his
ethics.
What changed now? So, I ask again, why not post his resume?

Fred


--
Best regards,

John Szeto -------------- We treat your cruise booking as if we were
going
ourselves.
Cruise and Travel Company
If you don't book from us, you're paying too much!
E-mail me at:
Cruise Review Library http://www.cruisereview.net



--
Best regards,

John Szeto -------------- We treat your cruise booking as if we were going
ourselves.
Cruise and Travel Company
If you don't book from us, you're paying too much!
E-mail me at:
Cruise Review Library http://www.cruisereview.net

Sorry Chip

1 no-name and 2 assholes now.


"John Szeto" wrote in message
...
Mike,

Never did I say I was the owner of the agency. Don't put words in my
mouth.
Also, like I said before, just because someone goes to school, doesn't
mean they
cannot be a full time agent. I know a lot of people who have full time
jobs and
go to night school. It is very common. I was a full time agent then and
a full
time agent now. You just had a hard time comprehending that fact.

Like I said before, enough said. That's why I have not been posting on
R.T.C.
for the past year or so anymore because of all the flame wars.


Mike Cordelli wrote:

I'm sorry, I had thought that in April of 2001, period of time you were
not
allowed to bid that you were still in school, were not an owner of a
travel
agency, and were not a full time travel agent. Obviously I'm mistaken,
at
that time you were all that and were certainly slighted by not being
allowed
to bid.

Again, if I'm wrong, and the post I was referring from April 11th or so
of
2001 is incorrect, and you did own an agency then, and were working full
time, then I'm wrong.

Nice try though.

"John Szeto" wrote in message
...
Mike,

For the record, I am a full time agent and got permission from the
agency
to
able to bind the contract for years already.

Get your facts straight. You can argue all you want. Enough said.


Mike Cordelli wrote:

No No No, he wasn't allowed to bid because he wasn't the owner or
even a
full time travel agent. That was back when they had rules.

"Freddyp" wrote in message
news:Xc5vc.1832$CW.698@lakeread05...
Well now Chip

Why would you bother to post Karen's resume and not John's? A
little
one
sided I would say. You do know how everyone has a thing for Mr.
Szeto,
don't
you? For years he was not allowed to bid on a GGC because of his
ethics.
What changed now? So, I ask again, why not post his resume?

Fred


--
Best regards,

John Szeto -------------- We treat your cruise booking as if we were
going
ourselves.
Cruise and Travel Company
If you don't book from us, you're paying too much!
E-mail me at:
Cruise Review Library http://www.cruisereview.net



--
Best regards,

John Szeto -------------- We treat your cruise booking as if we were
going
ourselves.
Cruise and Travel Company
If you don't book from us, you're paying too much!
E-mail me at:
Cruise Review Library http://www.cruisereview.net

Sue Keenan wrote in message ...
Lloyd Parsons wrote:
Woo Hoo! Did we get some nice bids in. And your ggc2005 committee has
been hard at work to decide what to put up for bid.

We got very nice responses from 4 Travel Agents, here they are (in no
particular order)
Karen Wheelock of WorldTravel Services of Tulsa, OK.
Cal Ford who we all know from here
John Szeto who has been trying forever it seems.
Peter Berlin who everyone also knows.

Wow, this is an eye-opener for this RTC-newsgroup newbie (only 211
threads dating back to Nov 2000).

In many other USENET groups, the Travel Agents are treated as
SPAMMERS, as they are most interesting in selling something to
the readers. Apparently not so, here?


Great selection from a bunch of excellent TA's.

Do then spread their commissions to the RTC readers/posters? :-)))


Lloyd

Tropicale 2000
Sensation GGC2002
Golden Princess GGC2003
Radiance of the Seas GGC2004
Celebrity Millenium GLC2005

So how many times has Karen Wheelock posted on rtc?


Sue ---found no posts from Google Groups

I confirm that finding. Of course s/he could have posted under
any of the anonymous posting agents or under the name "Howie"!
LOL LOL LOL LOL ... or Sunny ... LOL LOL LOL.

-- Bob.

I never said you said you were the owner of the agency. If you need to, get
somebody who can read to explain it to you.

What I said, and all I was doing was quoting a thread from April of 2001
that you were part of, was that due to the rules in place at the time you
could not bid on the silly cruise.

Nor did you dispute at the time that you were not full time with the agency.




"John Szeto" wrote in message
...
Mike,

Never did I say I was the owner of the agency. Don't put words in my
mouth.
Also, like I said before, just because someone goes to school, doesn't
mean they
cannot be a full time agent. I know a lot of people who have full time
jobs and
go to night school. It is very common. I was a full time agent then and
a full
time agent now. You just had a hard time comprehending that fact.

Like I said before, enough said. That's why I have not been posting on
R.T.C.
for the past year or so anymore because of all the flame wars.


Mike Cordelli wrote:

I'm sorry, I had thought that in April of 2001, period of time you were
not
allowed to bid that you were still in school, were not an owner of a
travel
agency, and were not a full time travel agent. Obviously I'm mistaken,
at
that time you were all that and were certainly slighted by not being
allowed
to bid.

Again, if I'm wrong, and the post I was referring from April 11th or so
of
2001 is incorrect, and you did own an agency then, and were working full
time, then I'm wrong.

Nice try though.

"John Szeto" wrote in message
...
Mike,

For the record, I am a full time agent and got permission from the
agency
to
able to bind the contract for years already.

Get your facts straight. You can argue all you want. Enough said.


Mike Cordelli wrote:

No No No, he wasn't allowed to bid because he wasn't the owner or
even a
full time travel agent. That was back when they had rules.

"Freddyp" wrote in message
news:Xc5vc.1832$CW.698@lakeread05...
Well now Chip

Why would you bother to post Karen's resume and not John's? A
little
one
sided I would say. You do know how everyone has a thing for Mr.
Szeto,
don't
you? For years he was not allowed to bid on a GGC because of his
ethics.
What changed now? So, I ask again, why not post his resume?

Fred


--
Best regards,

John Szeto -------------- We treat your cruise booking as if we were
going
ourselves.
Cruise and Travel Company
If you don't book from us, you're paying too much!
E-mail me at:
Cruise Review Library http://www.cruisereview.net



--
Best regards,

John Szeto -------------- We treat your cruise booking as if we were
going
ourselves.
Cruise and Travel Company
If you don't book from us, you're paying too much!
E-mail me at:
Cruise Review Library http://www.cruisereview.net

Nope, not nevermind. I was on the last GGC, and yes there was some
complaining, but the vast majority had a good time and didn't let the
small stuff get us down.....

Lloyd you may have been on the last GGC, I wasn't, but I was on the
first four. Petty sniping starting on the first GGC (not a lot, but
some) and reached a crescendo on 2002. It was to the point I said
screw it, I don't need this nor want it, I can enjoy cruising without
it. I have pretty much lurked (infrequently) on r.t.c. since that
time.

This current GGC seems to be no better. So far since posting the
original of this thread a handful of people have taken shots at Karen
Wheelock and at the committee's (right or wrong) decision to let her
submit a bid. Some of the comments border on petty sniping towards Ms
Wheelock.

You give a left handed comment to Peter Berlin, i.e. "While I don't
have a problem with Peter and think he has delivered on his promises,
I do know that others don't feel that way, so we wanted to get some
selection."

So far in the space of one day this group has probably managed to ****
off two of the 4 t/a's. Unless things have changed 500% here on
r.t.c. John Szeto probably doesn't have a prayer (after all his
shenanigans or years past). So, that leaves only Cal Ford and I have
to be wondering what the hell he was thinking.

IMO, the best thing these 4 t/a's could do would be to withdraw their
bids and collectively tell this group to "**** off", because as a
group, you aren't worth the head or heartache.

DocJohnB

In article , John
wrote:

Nope, not nevermind. I was on the last GGC, and yes there was some
complaining, but the vast majority had a good time and didn't let the
small stuff get us down.....

Lloyd you may have been on the last GGC, I wasn't, but I was on the
first four. Petty sniping starting on the first GGC (not a lot, but
some) and reached a crescendo on 2002. It was to the point I said
screw it, I don't need this nor want it, I can enjoy cruising without
it. I have pretty much lurked (infrequently) on r.t.c. since that
time.

Well, crescendo implies that it peaked in 2002, it didn't, it rose a
bit more in the 2003 also for many reasons.

This current GGC seems to be no better. So far since posting the
original of this thread a handful of people have taken shots at Karen
Wheelock and at the committee's (right or wrong) decision to let her
submit a bid. Some of the comments border on petty sniping towards Ms
Wheelock.

You give a left handed comment to Peter Berlin, i.e. "While I don't
have a problem with Peter and think he has delivered on his promises,
I do know that others don't feel that way, so we wanted to get some
selection."

It wasn't meant to be left handed as I respect Peter and count him as a
friend. He knows that.

So far in the space of one day this group has probably managed to ****
off two of the 4 t/a's. Unless things have changed 500% here on
r.t.c. John Szeto probably doesn't have a prayer (after all his
shenanigans or years past). So, that leaves only Cal Ford and I have
to be wondering what the hell he was thinking.

I don't doubt that you are correct. These TA's didn't deserve the flak
that was flying around. They worked hard to put these bids together
and I know that I certainly appreciate that effort.

IMO, the best thing these 4 t/a's could do would be to withdraw their
bids and collectively tell this group to "**** off", because as a
group, you aren't worth the head or heartache.

DocJohnB

To be frank it looked like the GGC2005 wasn't going to happen when I
was asked to volunteer. That it has gotten this far along is a credit
to those that volunteered to be on the committee and no less credit to
the TA's that bid. I was almost convinced that since 2 strong groups
were formed for January that many had already written off the GGC.

Thanks for your comments, a cooler head is alway nice to have around.

Lloyd