A Reply From Cunard

Dec 2, 2000
58,590
380
283
Easley South Carolina
>>Well it's pretty obvious to say that the newer things are, the more safety features they're going to have. That doesn't necessarily make them stronger. The same applies to cars.<<

I'm afraid you're still missing the point. The basic airframe of the 747 is a sound design, but time itself does it no favours. Airframe fatigue is an absolute fact of life so eventually the older airframes have to be replaced before they literally fall apart. Overage aircraft have been known to do that, sometimes when they're in the air and with disasterous consequences. This is also an absolute fact and well documented at that.

>>This might come as a bit of a shock to you, but you don't know everything about everything, and certainly not as much as you think you do,...<<

I never said that I did so this point is merely an irrelevant strawman. (However, I do have a background and training in aviation. Enough to understand the issues involved if only because I made it my business to find out.)

>>and it's absolutely none of your business to comment on correspondence that doesn't involve you.<<

And this is where my moderator's hat comes on. Adam, this is a public access forum and anything you post here...consistant with all respondants abiding by the rules...is fair game for comment and discussion by anybody who cares to take an interest.

>>As for Michael, I don't see why anyone should have to take any rubbish, and Michael constantly dishes it out. I for one will not, and neither should you or anybody else.<<

What I do is respond to the points made. You certainly have a right to your opinion and to express them, however, you do not have the right to have them go unchallanged.

None of us does.
 

Adam Went

Member
Apr 28, 2003
1,193
7
168
Michael:

Believe it or not, I have been a moderator myself on forums in the past. Forums with much more traffic and active members than this one has. I assume it must be down to the individual moderators beliefs then because I never would get involved in a conversation or comment that was directed specifically at somebody else, whether posted in the public domain or not - particularly when this particular comment was meant to be taken in jest. The job of a moderator is to manage and encourage discussion and debate, without allowing that to cross the boundary into personal insults and things of a ridiculous nature. That's all.

There are ways to respond to posts correctly - the "I know better than you do" type does not wash well, and, clearly, it causes problems.
 

Ernie Luck

Member
Nov 24, 2004
643
3
88
Hi Adam

As Michael pointed out, it is his job as moderator to intervene if comments get out of hand. For my own part I think he does a great job; every website needs a Michael - there is nothing worse than posting and being ignored. I sometimes wonder how successful this website would be without his efforts. I think you might be getting a few emails of your own to respond to.

I do agree with Bill. What has all this got to do with 'A reply from Cunard'
 

Adam Went

Member
Apr 28, 2003
1,193
7
168
Ernie:

Comments didn't get out of hand until Michael decided to put in his 2 cents worth, though. But that's your opinion. As I said, I'm a member on several other forums with many times more traffic than this one and the moderators are not so dominant. Been there and done it too. Many people would be driven away by such an attitude....

Anyway, as you say, we're off topic.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
380
283
Easley South Carolina
>>I assume it must be down to the individual moderators beliefs then because I never would get involved in a conversation or comment that was directed specifically at somebody else, whether posted in the public domain or not <<

Adam....enough. If you don't want it commented on here, then just don't mention it here. It's just that simple. If you do, that makes it fair game for anybody (Not just me.) who takes an interest and wishes to comment. So long as members abide by the rules (See https://www.encyclopedia-titanica.org/admin.php?angle=Rules ) then nobody has any cause or standing to grouse about it.

>>There are ways to respond to posts correctly - the "I know better than you do" type does not wash well, and, clearly, it causes problems.<<

And I never said that I do know better then anybody else. As I've pointed out, I've responded to your arguements and points with arguements and points of my own. I've also mentioned that I've had some of the professional training, experience and done the research to understand the issues in contention here.

I've participated in other words, and I will continue to do so.

Consistant with abiding by the rules of this forum, I fully expect you to do exactly the same thing.

>>without allowing that to cross the boundary into personal insults and things of a ridiculous nature. That's all. <<

And you haven't been insulted. If you had been, either I or one of my collegues would have edited or deleted the offending post. A moderator's job is not and never has been a barrier to participation, nor will it ever be.

>>Comments didn't get out of hand until Michael decided to put in his 2 cents worth, though.<<

It's called discussion and dabate, all of which is the lifeblood of any forum. You don't get to have it all your way and niether do I, nor does anybody else for that matter.

If you think this is somehow "Out of hand" you might want to do some net surfing and check out some forums which deal with politics, religion, or some matters of scientific controversy. They go way beyond hostile to the downright melevolant.
 

Adam Went

Member
Apr 28, 2003
1,193
7
168
Michael:

Look, it's clear we have very different views on the matter, as this thread is not the first time it has come up. As a couple of other members have already pointed out, this discussion has nothing at all to do with "A Reply From Cunard", that part of the topic has served its purpose, and so it's probably best just to leave it alone.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
380
283
Easley South Carolina
Then bring on a reply from Cunard if you get one beyond that which you've already recieved.

To be very candid, I'm not expecting that you'll be hearing from them as the reply you did get looked mighty like a brush off. A very diplomatic one but still a brush off.
 

Adam Went

Member
Apr 28, 2003
1,193
7
168
Michael:

Yup, I do agree with you on that one, and in any case I think it's highly unlikely I will receive a second reply, as I didn't bother replying to the first.... ;-)
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
380
283
Easley South Carolina
>>I think it's highly unlikely I will receive a second reply, as I didn't bother replying to the first.... ;-)<<

Oh, well, that does tend to kill any interest on the part of the line. Perhaps if you tried with a follow up enquiry somewhere down the road.

If Cunard wants to do something, they need to start planning it out and they probably need to start doing it last year.
 

Adam Went

Member
Apr 28, 2003
1,193
7
168
Well I did already thank them in advance for any info they could provide so I thought it would be a bit pointless to reply unless I had further questions for them....the fact that they took more a week or more to reply tells me they are more concerned with inquiries from people who actually want to book passage, and understandably so.

It doesn't necessarily have to be the Queen Mary 2 though.....they could use the brand spanking new Queen Victoria, which would also be much for fitting for the Titanic era! Who knows, maybe they do have something planned and don't want to reveal the details yet....
 
May 1, 2010
215
0
46
Perhaps a strange observation, but Cunard is NOT the company it used to be. One could wonder what real interest they have (if any) in their storied history. It is really pretty much a name only for Carnival to utilize however they can. I'll bet a few of us in here could come up with a few ideas to get the true die-hard lovers of liner history on board with them. But these days, they are just a small offshoot of a huge conglomeration.
 

Ernie Luck

Member
Nov 24, 2004
643
3
88
Do you mean the new Queen Elizabeth, Adam? The Queen Victoria's in her third season I believe. I must admit I'd rather do the transatlantic journey on the Flagship, Queen Mary 2 as we did recently - my memorial visit, albeit 2 years early. The first Westbound crossing this year left Southampton on 22 April.
 

Adam Went

Member
Apr 28, 2003
1,193
7
168
Steven:

I mentioned jokingly earlier in the thread that Cunard and White Star used to be major rivals and that maybe those old rivalries die hard....maybe there's some truth attached to it, eh? ;-)

Ernie:

I believe Queen Victoria was launched in 2008, right? I thought it was relatively new, but time flies....that was the new ship I was referring to, though.
 

Ernie Luck

Member
Nov 24, 2004
643
3
88
Inaugural cruise December 2007. Yes, time flies Adam. Our main holiday this year, a Baltic cruise on the Queen Vic. on Monday week. Will have to save our pennies for the Queen Elizabeth next year