Please sign in to post.
Posted by
2195 posts

Love it! Your photos are so interesting and evocative.

Posted by
692 posts

Thank you for sharing. I do love your photos. Thankful you could revisit.

Posted by
1115 posts

Ah, Paris….. Thanks so much for sharing, great photos. 5 more months before I’m there again. This was a wonderful tide-me-over boost.

Posted by
109 posts

You've got a wonderful eye. Thanks for bringing us along! I always look forward to seeing more of your travel photography.

Posted by
3328 posts

Read quick people, this one won't last. (see the info at the top of the forum for the reason)

Posted by
18458 posts

Carol, Gregg is a longtime member (since 2014: 983 posts; see his history) and isn't advertising anything. He's just linking his trip report on Fodor's - where he goes under the handle of Zebec - where you have the ability to post photos along with text. I wish we could do that here as it adds so much to the narrative...especially with a talented eye for the lens!

Posted by
5107 posts

Thanks so much for sharing. We’ll be in Paris in mid February so I am taking notes now.

Posted by
6997 posts

Thanks, gregg! Our favorite hotel is just a short walk from both the market on Rue Monge, and Rue Mouffetard. We enjoyed both just a couple of months ago, and can't wait to return next year! We were charmed by Rue Mouffetard. We had been there before, but this time we spent an entire Sunday afternoon, and were enchanted.

Posted by
1002 posts

A big merci to BB, PBS, Lyn, Bugs, Carol, Barb, Jane and Ellen. I really appreciate your nice words, folks. And a special Thanks to Kate--she and I go waaay back to the old Thorn Tree forum days on Lonely Planet. I once tried to break her out of Oak Park Heights, but she would not leave.

Kate's above clarification was correct. I am not now, nor have I ever been, advertising anything. My wife and I have never been given so much as a penny by the restaurants, hotels, shops and rentals which we've lauded. Webmaster Andrew has just asked that I re-present our TRs in such a way as to not conflict with the RS forum expectations as Carol has pointed out. Apparently, the policy has to do with being unable to reasonably verify sources and presumably ads. Hope that I've represented the RS side accurately. Fwiw, TA had the same concern and banned me long ago. Little sleep was lost.

If the concern has to do with businesses for which we have always given shout-outs to within our reports for years now, then all I can do is ask RS for some professional courtesy. Having done some semi-pro travel writing since the '80s, I've become a pretty good judge of which outfits truly deserve a recco. My wife is waaay smarter than me and she would concur.

*Note that for many years during my above travel-writing efforts (done on the side when I was a teechur), I sang the praises of the RS brand time and again.

Gotta admit, that I'm scratching my head a bit to have learned that mods have received reports about our recent TR. Surely travel teaches us all a variety of lessons, including what things to take issue with. It feels unseemly that any poster here would've bothered to make such a complaining report.

This poster will be happy to continue in this forum in a text-only fashion. Its all good.
I am done. The end.

Posted by
18458 posts

I'm scratching my head too. Gregg, yours is FAR from the first time a member's photos/trip reports which are posted to another site have been linked to share with the rest of us here. We're not allowed to do that with a personal blog or website but that's not what this is. I have one thread up right now that contains a link to an RS member's Rwanda TP, with pix, posted on another travel site, and within that same thread is the member's link to their Bruges and Ypers shots on Amazon Photos. We've seen TRs linked to any number of RS travelers' google photos too.

It would be different if this was a hit-and-run poster but it's not. It's an established member of the community. I'm sort of a visual animal and enjoy some of the snaps people share very much. Would be our loss to ban them.