Tourists

malinheader

Most of the tourists I see coming to my area are all in camper Vans and would spend very little in the area.

sunny2004

malinheader wrote: »

Most of the tourists I see coming to my area are all in camper Vans and would spend very little in the area.

Unfounded and silly statement.

im still trying to work this out, you can tell a tourist when they walk down the road ? Or are you saying you can only tell tourists if they have a camper van ?


So a tourist from the UK you can spot in a crowd ?

happyoutscan

sunny2004 wrote: »

Unfounded and silly statement.

im still trying to work this out, you can tell a tourist when they walk down the road ? Or are you saying you can only tell tourists if they have a camper van ?


So a tourist from the UK you can spot in a crowd ?

A fair few camper/caravan visitors from the North bring alot of what they need with them. Its obvious why.

jam83

I think letting your child sit on something's that's an attraction, and used for photo opportunities, is inconsiderate.
Tourists are the lifeblood of Galway. And I'm not talking about bending over backwards for them but I think you could ask your daughter to move if she's sitting on a tourist attraction.
That's my opinion. I think you were wrong. I said confrontation because I personally wouldn't do what you did, letting your daughter sit there on a busy Saturday, because it would invite hassle (friendly and all as that might be). You obviously didn't mind the hassle. I think it was selfish of you but that's my opinion,

nuac

Tourists are very important to the economy of not just Galway but of the entire West. We should welcome them and talk to them.

However as an experienced father and grandfather I believe the average kid will eat an icecream in about two minutes. Most people would wait for that, or ( with the parents' permission ) include the kid in the photo

sunny2004

happyoutscan wrote: »

A fair few camper/caravan visitors from the North bring alot of what they need with them. Its obvious why.

not sure you understood what I was replying to, please go back and read the post I had quoted. thanks.

malinheader

sunny2004 wrote: »

Unfounded and silly statement.

im still trying to work this out, you can tell a tourist when they walk down the road ? Or are you saying you can only tell tourists if they have a camper van ?


So a tourist from the UK you can spot in a crowd ?

In reply to you still trying to work out what I meant in my post. I haven't got a clue what your on about tourists walking down road's and spotting tourists in crowd's. Perhaps you should read what I posted again. And you might reconsider your silly post

sunny2004

malinheader wrote: »

In reply to you still trying to work out what I meant in my post. I haven't got a clue what your on about tourists walking down road's and spotting tourists in crowd's. Perhaps you should read what I posted again. And you might reconsider your silly post

By way of simplicity, are you saying you can tell a tourist on foot ?

You seem to quantify your tourist information based on their mode of transport.

My point was painfully simple, you are like all of us unable to calculate tourists who are on foot..


I actually though my original post was simple to understand..

inisboffin

ben.schlomo wrote: »

It's not a public facility. It's not a toilet or Park bench or parking space. It's a sculpture which is pictured by hundreds/thousands every day at this time of year. It was naive in the extreme by the OP to just assume they weren't going to have people want to photograph it. And their reaction sounds like someone who wants an argument and is easily offended. The city is built on, and relies on tourism, there are lots of areas in it to go and have a sit down without tourists wanting to take photos of them e.g. the Waterside, Spanish Arch, Eyre Square, ESC, Long Walk and all along the river.

But it IS a public facility. It is public art. It does not come with rules saying 'do not touch' 'do not photograph' 'do not sit' etc. Do you not think the artist knew that it would entice people to sit? Of course they did. What if someone is Sparching and has a picnic out and then some tourists ask you to move so they can get a full view? Not a chance! This smacks of plastic on the couch, except when the 'visitors' come. It was a KID ffs. As another poster pointed out she would probably only take up a few minutes. Common sense with an adult, but a kid. FFS come back later or ask can you take a photo with her in it too.

inisboffin

jam83 wrote: »

Who ''pretends'' to sit down on a bench for a photo? The bench is part of the whole sculpture, and everyone knows people use it for photo opportunities.

Nobody I know would see that as a seat as such. It's a sculpture or attraction that gets a lot of attention and what peace would you have sitting there?

Who pretends? Seriously? Have you never tourists 'fake' reading a book in the middle while someone snaps them. Or pretending to snooze? I've seen them. It's like the sitting equivalent of 'selfie face!' LOL.

And you say nobody would see that as a seat. Obviously this little kid did.

ben.schlomo

inisboffin wrote: »

But it IS a public facility. It is public art. It does not come with rules saying 'do not touch' 'do not photograph' 'do not sit' etc. Do you not think the artist knew that it would entice people to sit? Of course they did. What if someone is Sparching and has a picnic out and then some tourists ask you to move so they can get a full view? Not a chance! This smacks of plastic on the couch, except when the 'visitors' come. It was a KID ffs. As another poster pointed out she would probably only take up a few minutes. Common sense with an adult, but a kid. FFS come back later or ask can you take a photo with her in it too.

If you cant see the difference with getting a photo of a small sculpture and getting a photo anywhere around a large space like the Spanish Arch then there's little point debating the issue. As for common sense, well if it was used by the adult then the situation wouldn't have arisen in the first place.

fergiesfolly

Tourist-"Hi. Do you mind moving your child, so I can take a photo.
Local-" She's just finishing her ice cream. We'll move as soon as she's done"

If the conversation continues past that, politely ignore the tourist and enjoy the day with the child.

ForestFire

ben.schlomo wrote: »

If you cant see the difference with getting a photo of a small sculpture and getting a photo anywhere around a large space like the Spanish Arch then there's little point debating the issue. As for common sense, well if it was used by the adult then the situation wouldn't have arisen in the first place.

So what exactly do you tell a 3yo child?
The seat is free and she wants to sit down.
No you can't sit there?
But there is already a lady sitting there and there is a space free.
No you still can't sit there?
I'm tired I've been up since 7 and out all day and I want to sit to eat my tub.
No you can't sit there?

I don't get why people seem to think I was looking for confrontation or should to a different ice cream place or a different area.

We were there because we had dental appointment and going to shops in the area.

I don't want a long walk along the river, I don't want to have to carry the ice cream until it melts to eat. We are on our way home at this stage.

It's the first time this has ever happened and did almost as fergiesfolly said except it happen more than once and them just standing over us to move.

I've no problem with tourist but they need to be considerate too of locals and kids. We did not deliberately sit there to annoy anyway. As I said it was first time it happened.

fergiesfolly

ForestFire wrote: »

So what exactly do you tell a 3yo child?
The seat is free and she wants to sit down.
No you can't sit there?
But there is already a lady sitting there and there is a space free.
No you still can't sit there?
I'm tired I've been up since 7 and out all day and I want to sit to eat my tub.
No you can't sit there?

I don't get why people seem to think I was looking for confrontation or should to a different ice cream place or a different area.

We were there because we had dental appointment and going to shops in the area.

I don't want a long walk along the river, I don't want to have to carry the ice cream until it melts to eat. We are on our way home at this stage.

It's the first time this has ever happened and did almost as ferriesfolly said except it happen more than once and them just standing over us to move.

I've no problem with tourist but they need to be considerate too of locals and kids

Stop explaining yourself, you did nothing wrong.
If others disagree with you, let them off.

The tourist arse licking on this thread is sickening.
When I'm abroad, I'm polite, courteous, patient and respectful towards all, but especially towards the locals. I'm a guest in their city and wouldn't want to put them out.
If the tourists coming here can't behave the same, let them feck off home.

ben.schlomo

fergiesfolly wrote: »

Stop explaining yourself, you did nothing wrong.
If others disagree with you, let them off.

The tourist arse licking on this thread is sickening.
When I'm abroad, I'm polite, courteous, patient and respectful towards all, but especially towards the locals. I'm a guest in their city and wouldn't want to put them out.
If the tourists coming here can't behave the same, let them feck off home.

Ah yes I see, misbehaving by taking photos of points of interest. The OP is defending themselves after every post, they asked for opinions and have gotten ones which mostly disagree with them. They can sit where they want obviously, free country and all that but they shouldn't be offended by tourists wanting photos of a sculpture. There are far better locations to sit and enjoy the outdoors than the bustling main street. Drunks and junkies are the only ones I've ever seen sit there for any period of time.

893bet

Storm in a teacup.

ching

Passed by here today and seen a father and daughter eating ice cream.. was going to ask them to move so I could get a photo but thought I better not just incase the tourist police were called on me..
Totally agree a child is entitled to sit down but also as that is a tourist attraction it may occur when sitting there that tourists would like to take photos without other people in them..

bobbyss

maudgonner wrote: »

The statue was a gift to Galway from the people of Estonia, as far as I know. So I reckon the tourists have as much right to it as locals

Yes you are right.

Two gents with similar names who never visited the city as far as I know.

Galway and the people of Estonia? What did we do to deserve it I wonder?

ForestFire

ben.schlomo wrote: »

Ah yes I see, misbehaving by taking photos of points of interest. The OP is defending themselves after every post, they asked for opinions and have gotten ones which mostly disagree with them. They can sit where they want obviously, free country and all that but they shouldn't be offended by tourists wanting photos of a sculpture. There are far better locations to sit and enjoy the outdoors than the bustling main street. Drunks and junkies are the only ones I've ever seen sit there for any period of time.

Yes I asked for opinions and was interested, but that does not mean I have to accept them or not clarify or challenge them. Especially when someone says that a random tourist contributes more to Galway that us (per head/or the 10mins of tourist while we were there). Also people telling us were to go and what to do or we were looking for aggression.

Also why would I not defend us and our three year old daughter.

As I said this was the first time this happened to us, and once we were there I was shocked the way they tried to intimidate a 3yo off her seat.

Finally it was not a storm in a tea cup, more like a gentle ripple??(If that makes sense- ie nothing at all). I will proable try to avoid it in future for my daughters sake only, but I will keep an eye on the location to see how it's used over the summer.

In the end there are people that don't agree with me and some that do and that's fine.

No one has answered the question though...

If you were visiting somewhere as a tourist would you ask a 3yo eating to move from somewhere to get a photo, even if after seeing she was once disturbed already and regardless if it was a proper seat or not?

ForestFire

ching wrote: »

Passed by here today and seen a father and daughter eating ice cream.. was going to ask them to move so I could get a photo but thought I better not just incase the tourist police were called on me..
Totally agree a child is entitled to sit down but also as that is a tourist attraction it may occur when sitting there that tourists would like to take photos without other people in them..

That was us:) I brought a full days supply of icecream with me, poor girl is going to be sick in the morning:o

Joke by the way, just in case

malinheader

My answer to your question op is. If it was me i would have the manners not to disturb someone who has every right to be there , wait till the seat was vacant or ask politely if it was ok to take photo with little girl there. Simple.

If I'm not mistaken it is not so much a bench as it is a statue, it's purpose is to attract people to it and take their picture on it. It is not intended for someone to sit on it for extended periods of time. You'd hardly go to see the Allies bench in London and then sit there for awhile, it like the bench you refer to is a piece of art. Sure it can serve two purposes but it is first and foremost a place for tourists to take photos of and admire. There are plenty of places for your 3 year old to sit and don't get me started on the whole, "my 3-year-old does more for the economy by spending her money here every two weeks than these tourists do". Tourism keeps Galway alive, without it there would be a hell of a lot less jobs and if keeping tourists coming means that a 3 year old kid has to be asked to vacate a work of art then so be it, as has been said there are plenty of spaces you could have sat and been left alone but your post makes it sound like you were spoiling for an argument.

pjohnson

OP seemed needlessly confrontational and given his responses throughout this thread he just seems to like an argument.

joeKel73

ForestFire wrote: »

Would you move? Would you move your child?
If you were in a park would you move if sitting beside a fountain, statue or similar?

I don't think the tourist should have asked you to move, wander on and come back to it. As a tourist I'd always work around the locals.

But I also don't think they should have to ask - if you see them clearly interested in taking a photo you should have asked if they'd like to take a photo an offered to move for a moment.

joeKel73

maudgonner wrote: »

The statue was a gift to Galway from the people of Estonia, as far as I know. So I reckon the tourists have as much right to it as locals

They have the same status in Estonia...
https://www.visitestonia.com/en/sculpture-oscar-wilde-and-eduard-vilde

marklazarcovic

I now await a sign erected by council stating that maximum time allowed to sit during peak tourist season is 45 seconds,45 min outside of peak season..

I can understand the parents point,and I can understand the tourists point, if it were me I wouldn't want my kid sitting there anyway as every tourist will take pictures of it regardless. Would be uncomfortable.

xckjoo

Don't worry about it OP. You have the right to sit there, they have the right to ask you to move, you have the right to decide if ye would, etc. Nobodys civil liberties are being infringed here

But seriously, I wouldn't let my kid sit on it for hygiene reasons. The amount of vomit, urine and other undesirable liquids that end up on it must be astronomical. It always look like it's sticky as all hell too.

Bredabe

Passed a pair of guys carrying takeaway bags from the local asian, saw them then trying to eat the contents in the chipper. When told to leave replied "We are tourists, you have to be nice to us", guess the boss of that establishment didn't get the bending over backwards for tourists memo.:):D

bobbyss

J o e wrote: »

They have the same status in Estonia...
https://www.visitestonia.com/en/sculpture-oscar-wilde-and-eduard-vilde

This statue has little relevance to me.

Would it not have been more appropriate to have a reinvented P O' Connaire? I see a NUIG building recently named Alice Perry? Lady Gregory? Walter Macken? Gary Hynes?

I am trying to recall Galway's historical links with Estonia.

'Each of the new member-states will be "welcomed" officially into the EU with cultural celebrations in different Irish cities or towns that have been "twinned" with the 10 accession countries. The list of towns and countries is as follows: Bray (Cyprus); Cork (Slovakia); Drogheda (Latvia); Limerick (Slovenia); Galway (Estonia); Kilkenny (Lithuania); Killarney (Czech Republic); Letterkenny (Poland); Sligo (Hungary); and Waterford (Malta).'

The statue is a gift from the people of Estonia to mark their accession to the EU and Galway's twinning with them.