|
Post by kris on Aug 21, 2017 16:00:07 GMT
Blimey, I find myself in the rather uncomfortable position of agreeing with TellyMackus. Another twat.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Aug 21, 2017 16:03:24 GMT
Seems perfectly reasonable to me! well maybe just the bit about ... Anyway this just goes to show that if you think you have a valid point and want to make it publicly, doing it calmly and precisely is the way to do it. Doing it by means of an over-egged rant is always going to be unsuccessful (well, unless you are Donald Trump I suppose). IMO the law as it stands isn't fit for purpose - my purpose, being that the canals should primarily be a cruising network and not a linear housing estate. As I've often said before, I've nothing against continuous cruisers who want to explore the system or at least use their boats primarily for navigation. Those who regard their boats as merely a floating flat, know nothing about boating, are incompetent when moving and when tying up their boat, and basically would much rather not have to move at all, are not good for the waterways as I see them. I totally understand that there is an alternative viewpoint which is that the canals are ripe for solving the country's housing problems, but it's a viewpoint I don't subscribe to. But the law as it stands doesn't really agree with me. Pity. For the time being. Twat! Continuous Moron.
|
|
|
Post by Andyberg on Aug 21, 2017 16:05:49 GMT
|
|
|
Post by kris on Aug 21, 2017 16:07:26 GMT
Would you like to quote where anybody has said that the inland waterways are the answer to the housing problems in this country?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2017 16:15:31 GMT
I find your intelligence sadly lacking, to agree with a man complaining about 'continuing cruising licence' holders etc.
I am willing to listen to well considered views, whether I agree or not.
Your reports on the K&A were interesting, but were based in fact from your own perception, not mindless ignorant rants.
I suspect the marina owner's main point of contention is that he has empty berths, but I do not know that to be the case so will reserve judgement.
Rog
|
|
|
Post by IainS on Aug 21, 2017 16:22:16 GMT
A candidate for humorous boat names, perhaps?
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Aug 21, 2017 17:03:24 GMT
I find your intelligence sadly lacking, to agree with a man complaining about 'continuing cruising licence' holders etc. I am willing to listen to well considered views, whether I agree or not. Your reports on the K&A were interesting, but were based in fact from your own perception, not mindless ignorant rants. I suspect the marina owner's main point of contention is that he has empty berths, but I do not know that to be the case so will reserve judgement. Rog I find your intelligence sadly lacking if you think I agree with several of his more extreme points, and inaccuracies such as talking about CCing licence. Especially as I said as much in my reply.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Aug 21, 2017 17:09:01 GMT
Would you like to quote where anybody has said that the inland waterways are the answer to the housing problems in this country? No. But it's often said that it's perfectly reasonable (and legal) for people to buy boats to live on, without any intention of actually going cruising any more than they absolutely have to by law. And it's surely not disputed that the congestion in London arises because folk can't afford to live on land?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2017 18:55:17 GMT
π€£ππ€£π typical Nick tripe. He who accused boats of cming on the k&a during his outbound trip, then stated they had all gone when he was returning. Thou doth spout more shit than a cesspit. π€£
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2017 19:11:28 GMT
I find it quite funny how people go on about "ccing" licenses and that they don't exist.
The thing is that although they don't exist "literally" as in written on a bit of paper, they do effectively exist in reality. If you buy a cruising license there is a tick box which you tick to say you don't have a mooring or other place where blah blah blah or boat out of water when not in use blah blah blah etc. And that you agree to use the boat bona fide for blah blah blah etc.
So effectively the "continuous cruising license" does exist even though some people may like to think it doesn't.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2017 19:14:06 GMT
Seems perfectly reasonable to me! well maybe just the bit about ... Anyway this just goes to show that if you think you have a valid point and want to make it publicly, doing it calmly and precisely is the way to do it. Doing it by means of an over-egged rant is always going to be unsuccessful (well, unless you are Donald Trump I suppose). IMO the law as it stands isn't fit for purpose - my purpose, being that the canals should primarily be a cruising network and not a linear housing estate. As I've often said before, I've nothing against continuous cruisers who want to explore the system or at least use their boats primarily for navigation. Those who regard their boats as merely a floating flat, know nothing about boating, are incompetent when moving and when tying up their boat, and basically would much rather not have to move at all, are not good for the waterways as I see them. I totally understand that there is an alternative viewpoint which is that the canals are ripe for solving the country's housing problems, but it's a viewpoint I don't subscribe to. But the law as it stands doesn't really agree with me. Pity. For the time being. Which bit did I miss? Rog
|
|
|
Post by kris on Aug 21, 2017 19:50:30 GMT
Would you like to quote where anybody has said that the inland waterways are the answer to the housing problems in this country?Β No. But it's often said that it's perfectly reasonable (and legal) for people to buy boats to live on, without any intention of actually going cruising any more than they absolutely have to by law. And it's surely not disputed that the congestion in London arises because folk can't afford to live on land? it's often said by whom? As usual Nick your making it up as you go along.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Aug 21, 2017 19:53:18 GMT
I find it quite funny how people go on about "ccing" licenses and that they don't exist. The thing is that although they don't exist "literally" as in written on a bit of paper, they do effectively exist in reality. If you buy a cruising license there is a tick box which you tick to say you don't have a mooring or other place where blah blah blah or boat out of water when not in use blah blah blah etc. And that you agree to use the boat bona fide for blah blah blah etc. So effectively the "continuous cruising license" does exist even though some people may like to think it doesn't. Yes, agreed, a licence granted to a boater who makes a continuous cruising declaration is to all intents and purposes a continuous cruising licence.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2017 19:58:53 GMT
But all licences permit cruising continuously. It's the boat owners who decide to take moorings, and then whinge that those who don't pay for a mooring are 'getting away ' with something. It's not the factual inaccuracy that's irritating, rather the ignorance that it represents. Even Telemachus is a continuous cruiser at present Rog
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Aug 21, 2017 20:09:38 GMT
But all licences permit cruising continuously. It's the boat owners who decide to take moorings, and then whinge that those who don't pay for a mooring are 'getting away ' with something. It's not the factual inaccuracy that's irritating, rather the ignorance that it represents. Even Telemachus is a continuous cruiser at present Rog All licences permit continuous cruising, licences issued to boaters without a home mooring require it. I really don't care if other boaters have a home mooring or not, although I do accept that there is a problem with the huge amount of liveaboard boaters in London making life extremely difficult for visiting boaters. TellyMackus is cruising at the moment, but he has a home mooring therefore he is not a continuous cruiser.
|
|