Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2016 13:50:47 GMT
I see what you mean but I don't think that would happen. It seems more likely that the result of too much "boat rocking" would simply be more regulation and increased costs for small boat based traders. That's what I read into junior and TGs comments anyway. Why would that follow ? finding out the legal basis of the licence doesnt affect the fee, or the terms and conditions. Stop panicking. Panicking? What? Anyway you obviously can't see what I mean. Carry on.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Dec 21, 2016 13:53:17 GMT
What do you mean "fuck it" ? Are you afraid trading licences will be no longer offered because of this thread ? Do you realise if that was the case you would still be free to trade anyway ? Do you want a legal or illegal licence as a basis for your business ? Both TG and junior are relatively new to the "cut", so are not I suspect privy to the history, or complexity of trading licences. One of the problems encountered when questioning any of CRT's management of the waterways, is the sheer apathy shown by many boat owners and users. Most tend to either fear, ignore, or simply look after their own interests, (having no real care for the waterways overall). I don't generally like to stereotype, but it is a fact. Very few get past having a "little moan" on the Internet, or social media, whilst missing the fact that safety is in numbers, and a bigger number together could in fact change CRT's behaviour. This leaves a minority doing all the running, (sadly with very little support) and bearing the brunt of not only CRT's condemnation, but also the majority of boat owners whom the minority are actually trying to protect. I don't see in the near future any change to this position, and feel that boating on the inland waterways will slowly die away over time, along with the real characters who initiated, and attempted to continue it's resurgence. The UK’s biggest "theme park" is just around the corner. For me it is a case of choosing one's battles carefully, since you can't win every one. So for example if it is a battle to improve maintenance and facilities, count me in. If it is a battle for those who seek to tread the finest possible path between "legal" and "not legal" which the intent of getting as much for themselves as possible and hang everyone else, I'm probably out but it would "depend". But if it is a battle to get revenge for a chap who used his boat on the cut for a prolonged period whilst steadfastly refusing to pay for a licence, cost CRT and hence ultimately me and others like me a lot of money to resolve, then I am definitely out.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2016 14:12:50 GMT
Both TG and junior are relatively new to the "cut", so are not I suspect privy to the history, or complexity of trading licences. One of the problems encountered when questioning any of CRT's management of the waterways, is the sheer apathy shown by many boat owners and users. Most tend to either fear, ignore, or simply look after their own interests, (having no real care for the waterways overall). I don't generally like to stereotype, but it is a fact. Very few get past having a "little moan" on the Internet, or social media, whilst missing the fact that safety is in numbers, and a bigger number together could in fact change CRT's behaviour. This leaves a minority doing all the running, (sadly with very little support) and bearing the brunt of not only CRT's condemnation, but also the majority of boat owners whom the minority are actually trying to protect. I don't see in the near future any change to this position, and feel that boating on the inland waterways will slowly die away over time, along with the real characters who initiated, and attempted to continue it's resurgence. The UK’s biggest "theme park" is just around the corner. For me it is a case of choosing one's battles carefully, since you can't win every one. So for example if it is a battle to improve maintenance and facilities, count me in. If it is a battle for those who seek to tread the finest possible path between "legal" and "not legal" which the intent of getting as much for themselves as possible and hang everyone else, I'm probably out but it would "depend". But if it is a battle to get revenge for a chap who used his boat on the cut for a prolonged period whilst steadfastly refusing to pay for a licence, cost CRT and hence ultimately me and others like me a lot of money to resolve, then I am definitely out. With due respect nick, I've only ever considered you to be someone whose "just passing by" with one of your toys (albeit that toy being a hudson).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2016 14:21:09 GMT
What do you mean "fuck it" ? Are you afraid trading licences will be no longer offered because of this thread ? Do you realise if that was the case you would still be free to trade anyway ? Do you want a legal or illegal licence as a basis for your business ? Both TG and junior are relatively new to the "cut", so are not I suspect privy to the history, or complexity of trading licences. One of the problems encountered when questioning any of CRT's management of the waterways, is the sheer apathy shown by many boat owners and users. Most tend to either fear, ignore, or simply look after their own interests, (having no real care for the waterways overall). I don't generally like to stereotype, but it is a fact. Very few get past having a "little moan" on the Internet, or social media, whilst missing the fact that safety is in numbers, and a bigger number together could in fact change CRT's behaviour. This leaves a minority doing all the running, (sadly with very little support) and bearing the brunt of not only CRT's condemnation, but also the majority of boat owners whom the minority are actually trying to protect. I don't see in the near future any change to this position, and feel that boating on the inland waterways will slowly die away over time, along with the real characters who initiated, and attempted to continue it's resurgence. The UK’s biggest "theme park" is just around the corner. I find this incredibly patronising.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2016 14:31:24 GMT
Both TG and junior are relatively new to the "cut", so are not I suspect privy to the history, or complexity of trading licences. One of the problems encountered when questioning any of CRT's management of the waterways, is the sheer apathy shown by many boat owners and users. Most tend to either fear, ignore, or simply look after their own interests, (having no real care for the waterways overall). I don't generally like to stereotype, but it is a fact. Very few get past having a "little moan" on the Internet, or social media, whilst missing the fact that safety is in numbers, and a bigger number together could in fact change CRT's behaviour. This leaves a minority doing all the running, (sadly with very little support) and bearing the brunt of not only CRT's condemnation, but also the majority of boat owners whom the minority are actually trying to protect. I don't see in the near future any change to this position, and feel that boating on the inland waterways will slowly die away over time, along with the real characters who initiated, and attempted to continue it's resurgence. The UK’s biggest "theme park" is just around the corner. I find this incredibly patronising. Bummer. I feel its an honest statement of facts. However, I can understand others not liking it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2016 14:39:46 GMT
I don't particularly dislike it. Just find it patronising
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Dec 21, 2016 14:53:06 GMT
For me it is a case of choosing one's battles carefully, since you can't win every one. So for example if it is a battle to improve maintenance and facilities, count me in. If it is a battle for those who seek to tread the finest possible path between "legal" and "not legal" which the intent of getting as much for themselves as possible and hang everyone else, I'm probably out but it would "depend". But if it is a battle to get revenge for a chap who used his boat on the cut for a prolonged period whilst steadfastly refusing to pay for a licence, cost CRT and hence ultimately me and others like me a lot of money to resolve, then I am definitely out. With due respect nick, I've only ever considered you to be someone whose "just passing by" with one of your toys (albeit that toy being a hudson). Of course you do. You don't realise that I've been canal boating for far longer than you have.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2016 14:57:14 GMT
With due respect nick, I've only ever considered you to be someone whose "just passing by" with one of your toys (albeit that toy being a hudson). Of course you do. You don't realise that I've been canal boating for far longer than you have. 😂😂😂😂😂. I do love it when folk come out with "I've been boating for 30 yrs".
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Dec 21, 2016 15:16:10 GMT
Of course you do. You don't realise that I've been canal boating for far longer than you have. 😂😂😂😂😂. I do love it when folk come out with "I've been boating for 30 yrs". Me too. On the other hand my first canal boat trip (in a day cruiser, but you'll have to forgive me that as it was pretty much all that was available at the time!) was in 1966. Hmmmm, I think that is 50 years ago! By 1969 my schoolmate Chris and I were "allowed out" in his dad's boat for a weekend on the BCN sans-parents (centre cockpit cruiser). Early 70s our family hired from Wolverhampton and went to Llangollen and back in a week. The next year we hired from Trevor and went to Whaley Bridge and back in a week. On leaving school a group of us took his Dad's new narrowboat up to Ripon and back (to Warwickshire). Etc. So don't talk to me about a paltry 30 years and "passing through", you nouveau-boating young whipper-snapper you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2016 15:17:00 GMT
Its similar to saying '..relatively new to the "cut" '
I don't think it really makes that much difference how long someone has been on the cut. I've been on the cut since the Victorian days but this does not matter.
More seriously if we are willy waving I have lived on the cut since I was 20 And I am 42 now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2016 15:26:49 GMT
Its similar to saying '..relatively new to the "cut" ' I don't think it really makes that much difference how long someone has been on the cut. I've been on the cut since the Victorian days but this does not matter. More seriously if we are willy waving I have lived on the cut since I was 20 And I am 42 now. I shall repeat the whole sentence for you, hopefully this time enabling you to take in the context of the sentence 😊 "Both TG and junior are relatively new to the "cut", so are not I suspect privy to the history, or complexity of trading licences."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2016 15:28:59 GMT
😂😂😂😂😂. I do love it when folk come out with "I've been boating for 30 yrs". Me too. On the other hand my first canal boat trip (in a day cruiser, but you'll have to forgive me that as it was pretty much all that was available at the time!) was in 1966. Hmmmm, I think that is 50 years ago! By 1969 my schoolmate Chris and I were "allowed out" in his dad's boat for a weekend on the BCN sans-parents (centre cockpit cruiser). Early 70s our family hired from Wolverhampton and went to Llangollen and back in a week. The next year we hired from Trevor and went to Whaley Bridge and back in a week. On leaving school a group of us took his Dad's new narrowboat up to Ripon and back (to Warwickshire). Etc. So don't talk to me about a paltry 30 years and "passing through", you nouveau-boating young whipper-snapper you. OK nick. So I consider you to be "just passing" through, but taking a bloody long time doing so.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2016 15:37:47 GMT
Yes I did read the original sentence but as you seem to think I am stupid I am happy for you to repeat yourself.
|
|
|
Post by tadworth on Dec 21, 2016 18:35:20 GMT
For me it is a case of choosing one's battles carefully, since you can't win every one. So for example if it is a battle to improve maintenance and facilities, count me in. If it is a battle for those who seek to tread the finest possible path between "legal" and "not legal" which the intent of getting as much for themselves as possible and hang everyone else, I'm probably out but it would "depend". But if it is a battle to get revenge for a chap who used his boat on the cut for a prolonged period whilst steadfastly refusing to pay for a licence, cost CRT and hence ultimately me and others like me a lot of money to resolve, then I am definitely out. It didnt cost you anything. I didnt use my boat, i didnt refuse to pay for a licence, nor does questioning the legal basis of CRT's schemes equal revenge. Otherwise a great post.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2016 19:15:26 GMT
Deleted
|
|