Caribbean Princess review on Cruise Critic

In article .com,
Warren wrote:

I wrote directly to the editor. She replied back this morning that
she'd pass along my concerns. No change.

That is who I wrote to first. The editer passed it along to Laura.

--
Charles

In article , Bill
wrote:

Have you tried complaining on their board, or would they delete
anti-CC comments?

You might point them at this site (if they care):

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/jew.html

My guess is they would delete any comments on their board.

From their response I don't think they have a clue. There is not even
any indication that they understood that the phrase used was
anti-semetic. It was just a "technical" response.

--
Charles

I did not bother to follow this thread because I don't go to Cruise
Critic, so truthfully, I just figured out what is was about. But now
that I have ...

I just want to say that I have always found that expression especially
perjorative, and I cringe whenever I hear someone say it even in casual
conversation, which I am happy to say is very rarely these days.

I cannot see how Cruise Critic could possibly let that stand, or how a
change to "chew" (which is not a common expression and and obviously is
meant to be a white-washed reference to the original statement) is
acceptable. Unbelievable. This would never happen at Cruisemates.

Paul Motter
CruiseMates

"Bill" wrote in message
...
Charles wrote:

In article om,
Warren wrote:

No, "chew" is still there.

In one paragraph it says "barter", in the next it says "chew."

Why the editor didn't just change it to "barter" to be consistent is a
mystery.

I wrote back to Cruise Critic about the change they made not being
enough. Laura wrote back that she thought the change to "chew" was
sufficient. Unfortunatly that shows ignorance on her part as to what
was wrong to begin with. All I can say is the result reflects badly on
Cruise Critic.

--
Charles

Have you tried complaining on their board, or would they delete
anti-CC comments?

You might point them at this site (if they care):

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/jew.html

Bill

What disturbs me is that *chew* sounds too much like the first word that she
used..Besides, it really doesn't make any sense as it is not commonly
used..Why can't they just substitute *bargain* or *negotiate*? All they
need to do is contact the author of that review and ask to insert one of
those words instead, for heaven's sake!

--Jean

Why should they? They are getting all kinds of publicity for this. Motter is
also wrong about Cruisemates, it did happen there on one of the boards and
that post was deleted within an hour and the originator was informed why and
asked to resubmit without using that phrase as some people feel insulted by
it. End of story. Oh wait, had CM left it there they would be accused of
being terrible and of course advertising. LOL
Jim


"Jean O'Boyle" wrote in message
. com...

"Bill" wrote in message
...
Charles wrote:

In article om,
Warren wrote:

No, "chew" is still there.

In one paragraph it says "barter", in the next it says "chew."

Why the editor didn't just change it to "barter" to be consistent is a
mystery.

I wrote back to Cruise Critic about the change they made not being
enough. Laura wrote back that she thought the change to "chew" was
sufficient. Unfortunatly that shows ignorance on her part as to what
was wrong to begin with. All I can say is the result reflects badly on
Cruise Critic.

--
Charles

Have you tried complaining on their board, or would they delete
anti-CC comments?

You might point them at this site (if they care):

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/jew.html

Bill

What disturbs me is that *chew* sounds too much like the first word that
she used..Besides, it really doesn't make any sense as it is not commonly
used..Why can't they just substitute *bargain* or *negotiate*? All they
need to do is contact the author of that review and ask to insert one of
those words instead, for heaven's sake!

--Jean

In article , jim
wrote:

Why should they? They are getting all kinds of publicity for this. Motter is
also wrong about Cruisemates, it did happen there on one of the boards and
that post was deleted within an hour and the originator was informed why and
asked to resubmit without using that phrase as some people feel insulted by
it. End of story. Oh wait, had CM left it there they would be accused of
being terrible and of course advertising. LOL

Motter said he could not see how they would let it stand. The point
being as I read it was that Cruisemates would not let it stand. If it
happened as you describe and they deleted it within an hour and
explained to the person the reason, then I think Cruisemates did pretty
good. I don't expect any web site to have the capability to catch every
offensive post or review in advance. Within an hour is more than
reasonable. In light of that information and also the fact that you are
gone from Cruisemates, I intend to start reading the Cruisemates web
site again.

--
Charles

In article , Bill
wrote:

Have you tried complaining on their board, or would they delete
anti-CC comments?

Seeing as another day passed with no further response by e-mail or a
change in the review, I did post about it on their Princess board at
7:11 pm.

--
Charles

Good, I hope you do. Also be advised I was the one that deleted the post and
had the poster informed and asked to change it to which she complied. G Of
course your dislike for me because I will not kiss your ass or anyone else's
was a really stupid reason in the past. Then again, my being there had
nothing to do with your loathing of that website according to you in the
past. LOL
Jim


"Charles" wrote in message
d...
In article , jim
wrote:

Why should they? They are getting all kinds of publicity for this. Motter
is
also wrong about Cruisemates, it did happen there on one of the boards
and
that post was deleted within an hour and the originator was informed why
and
asked to resubmit without using that phrase as some people feel insulted
by
it. End of story. Oh wait, had CM left it there they would be accused of
being terrible and of course advertising. LOL

Motter said he could not see how they would let it stand. The point
being as I read it was that Cruisemates would not let it stand. If it
happened as you describe and they deleted it within an hour and
explained to the person the reason, then I think Cruisemates did pretty
good. I don't expect any web site to have the capability to catch every
offensive post or review in advance. Within an hour is more than
reasonable. In light of that information and also the fact that you are
gone from Cruisemates, I intend to start reading the Cruisemates web
site again.

--
Charles

In article . com,
Warren wrote:

Charles wrote:
Seeing as another day passed with no further response by e-mail or a
change in the review, I did post about it on their Princess board at
7:11 pm.


And they must have removed the post. I can't find it!

Warren

They deleted the thread sometime between 9:32pm and 10:00pm. There were
at least 31 posts in the thread before they deleted it.

--
Charles

"Charles" wrote in message
d...

They deleted the thread sometime between 9:32pm and 10:00pm. There were
at least 31 posts in the thread before they deleted it.


Good! I take it that the threads were also objecting to it? They may have
read the objections in rtc, also.

--Jean