Originally Posted by PTravel

However, I will say that conducting this specific type of meeting in such a context occurs often and doesn't require absolute silence and privacy.

Originally Posted by rufflesinc

So its confidental but doesnt require privacy?? :confused: :confused: you cant have it both ways, since m-w defines "confidential" as

2 : PRIVATE, SECRET <confidential information>

Methinks such a "conversation" thats "confidental" but doesnt need "privacy" could easily be held in the hotel room ;) ;)

Originally Posted by PTravel

Of course, you have absolutely no idea what the meeting was about, the nature of the discussion, what it required, and what venue was appropriate. Don't let that stop you, though, from telling me how to conduct my business.

Originally Posted by PTravel

That means I object to parents who place a baby carrier that was on the floor on a table.

Originally Posted by PTravel

Of course, you have absolutely no idea what the meeting was about, the nature of the discussion, what it required, and what venue was appropriate. Don't let that stop you, though, from telling me how to conduct my business.

Originally Posted by PTravel

I guess I don't understand your point. No one else in the lounge was disruptive. Certainly, all the business people using it didn't interfere with the parents' ability to be there. It's not a question of class membership, i.e. parents vs. business people -- if the kid wasn't noisy and the carrier wasn't on the table, I wouldn't have cared or, for that matter, even have noticed. I don't see why having paid the price admission permits someone to interfere with everyone else's use of a facility.

Originally Posted by clarkef

While I sympathize with the OP, his basic assumption is faulty. He assumes that a C-lounge is intended for business meetings. However, there is nothing in the literature that supports that assumption. In fact, I was recently at a Concierge Lounge that specifically forbade business meetings.

Each property sets the tone for its C-Lounge which can often be influenced by the local. In Southern California, lounges tend to be more informal, in part because of the beach cultures. By contrast, I was at a hotel in Belgium where most of the guests wore suits to the lounge. During my stay at the hotel, not once did I see one child or even teenager.

Originally Posted by psychephylax

You do realize that you just check mated yourself on this one....

Let's rephrase what you wrote to look something like this:

Of course, you have absolutely no idea what the circumstances were of that family [in your previous post], the reason Marriott chose not do act on the problem and what potential consequences there were. Don't let that stop you, though, from telling Marriott how to conduct their business.

Originally Posted by rufflesinc

actually YOU described it as "confidential" and "not requiring privacy." its really not cool to make posts, say "i cant go into details but [insert description]" and then say the description isnt valid. so again, either its confidential and requires privacy, or not confiedntial and doesnt require privacy, or you're just pulling terms out of the air to justify your "me first" attitude. either way, the other posters have said everything

Originally Posted by PTravel

Very interesting responses.

I am universally condemned by, only, parents, all of whom have children who are perfect little angels who "know how to behave." All these children never disturb anyone -- it's only Other People's Children.

Foodguy says, "I will hold a casual meeting at best in a c-lounge (particularly during the foodservice times in the morning and evening)." Of course, this is exactly what I did, but everyone, including Foodguy, decided I was wrong to have my meeting when and where I did because I'm "child bashing" when I object to shrieking toddlers (not "children playing," heffa) in the confined space of a Concierge Lounge which, despite psychephylax' contention, is designed, furnished and structured to appeal to adult business travelers, and is NOT furnished with high-chairs, brightly colored plastic furniture, toys and the other detritus that generally demarcates a "family friendly" location.

An awful lot of posters straining mightily to justify the actions of one set of filthy, ill-mannered and inconsiderate parents who disturbed some 15 other people. It would seem I struck a nerve. I wonder why?

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Something tells me that a child being a child is disruptive, while a jerk conducting business on a mobile phone would be OK. I'd rather listen to the toddler.

Originally Posted by PTravel

Nope.

A toddler shrieking continuously is disruptive. A business person shouting into a phone is disruptive. However, there weren't any business people shouting into phones in the CL. There was a continuously shrieking toddler.

Something tells me that you, and people like you, for example the ones who refer to my complaint as "child bashing," either simply haven't read what I've posted (or didn't understand it), or have their own agenda, i.e. "anything my child does is privileged."