Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2016 17:50:20 GMT
Liveaboard continuous cruisers keep the waterways alive, and "fit for purpose". They are a thorn in crt's backside, because, they continue to exist, and in doing so, they ensure crt respects the responsibilities laid before them by government. This will always be the case as long as there are continuous cruisers. The canals left to the likes and whims of some leisure boaters, would see CRT neglect vast areas of canal network, only maintaining the popular "touristy prefabricated bubble spots" where some can show off their shiny brass and pop rivets (penis extensions). I am not sure you are totally correct in that statement. I am 100% correct, and sorry that you don't like this fact.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2016 17:52:08 GMT
I am not sure you are totally correct in that statement. Certainly some do, but some don't. You are ignoring the fact that there are a large number of leisure boaters who in a comparatively restricted time, rack up many more miles than quite a few liveaboard continuous cruisers. Agreed, however I didn't think it worth commenting on because you'll never convince the live-aboards that they aren't the most important element of the canals, so no point in even trying. As I have stated before, you only partake of the waterways because Jeff enjoys it. If it were not for that, you wouldn't bother.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Aug 23, 2016 17:52:45 GMT
I am not sure you are totally correct in that statement. I am 100% correct, and sorry that you don't like this fact. do you include the so called continuous cruisers who shuffle about in London ? because if you don't, you are not telling the whole story and if you are, then you are fudging your figures.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Aug 23, 2016 17:57:11 GMT
I think the people who live on a certain stretch (for arguments sake enough to satisfy the board) are more likely to notice incremental changes in the maintenance. Whereas somebody who boats on that stretch occasionally will notice much less the slight incremental changes. It's sad that all the old divisions rear there ugly head even in an as amicable thread as this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2016 17:57:21 GMT
I am 100% correct, and sorry that you don't like this fact. do you include the so called continuous cruisers who shuffle about in London ? because if you don't, you are not telling the whole story and if you are, then you are fudging your figures. I don't know or see any "shuffling" in London (and I visit often, with and without boat). I bet I spend more time in London than you, so am therefore better equipped to make a statement.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Aug 23, 2016 18:12:58 GMT
you are being evasive. You know as well as I do that there are considerable numbers of liveaboards claiming continuous cruiser status, who move just enough to keep CRT off their backs. To attempt to ignore that considerably weakens your position. Why not accept the fact that there are large numbers of boaters of all different types, who travel the less popular parts of the system. Instead of that you alienate a large number of people who would otherwise support you. In spite of being ill and in hospital for part of the year, and having hardly been cruising this year I have racked up more miles than CRT would demand of a CCer (or if not yet, certainly by the end of the week)
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Aug 23, 2016 18:14:51 GMT
Agreed, however I didn't think it worth commenting on because you'll never convince the live-aboards that they aren't the most important element of the canals, so no point in even trying. As I have stated before, you only partake of the waterways because Jeff enjoys it. If it were not for that, you wouldn't bother. Yes you have stated it before. You were wrong then as you are now but there will be no convincing you that you know what is in my mind less well than I do.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2016 18:19:24 GMT
you are being evasive. You know as well as I do that there are considerable numbers of liveaboards claiming continuous cruiser status, who move just enough to keep CRT off their backs. To attempt to ignore that considerably weakens your position. Why not accept the fact that there are large numbers of boaters of all different types, who travel the less popular parts of the system. Instead of that you alienate a large number of people who would otherwise support you. In spite of being ill and in hospital for part of the year, and having hardly been cruising this year I have racked up more miles than CRT would demand of a CCer (or if not yet, certainly by the end of the week) Your clutching at straws and talking shit. You have probably never even been on a London canal in the last three years. You just pump the same old crap that others do. It fits your opinions, but smacks of hearsay and fairytales.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Aug 23, 2016 18:28:17 GMT
So anyway because a small percentage of boaters take the piss. We all have to give up on any future for the waterways? That's what I'm supposed to take away from this thread is it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2016 18:33:43 GMT
So anyway because a small percentage of boaters take the piss. We all have to give up on any future for the waterways? That's what I'm supposed to take away from this thread is it? Your thread title was quite clear, but as is par for the course John v, nifty nick, and popcorn Peter pudding wanted to drag in their own usual brand of crap. Obviously, they should take a leaf out of dogshits book, buy caravans and bugger off. That way, the canals can be cared for by those who have a genuine interest. (rather than by three posers doing their utmost best to prove their penis extensions are bigger than those around them that are painted rustic red).
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Aug 23, 2016 18:41:32 GMT
I think the people who live on a certain stretch (for arguments sake enough to satisfy the board) are more likely to notice incremental changes in the maintenance. Whereas somebody who boats on that stretch occasionally will notice much less the slight incremental changes. It's sad that all the old divisions rear there ugly head even in an as amicable thread as this. You are right in what you state, however that clashes with Jenlyns flat statement. They might notice deterioration in their own little area but that hardly constitutes Jenlyn's claim that they keep the whole system open. The people who keep the whole system open are the people who travel it and not all of them are continuous cruising liveaboards. And Jenlyn you talk shite. You are well aware that I have been unable to cruise any canals for three years as I have been seriously ill. I have made no secret of the fact and have mentioned it many times in posts. So to post that lowers my opinion of you considerably. Four years ago, before I became ill I cruised about 250 miles including London and part of the Lee and the tidal Thames. The year prior to that in excess of 400 miles in Northern canals. The year before that parts of the Midlands. The numbers of shufflers has certainly not gone down since then.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Aug 23, 2016 18:45:08 GMT
So anyway because a small percentage of boaters take the piss. We all have to give up on any future for the waterways? That's what I'm supposed to take away from this thread is it? Your thread title was quite clear, but as is par for the course John v, nifty nick, and popcorn Peter pudding wanted to drag in their own usual brand of crap. Obviously, they should take a leaf out of dogshits book, buy caravans and bugger off. That way, the canals can be cared for by those who have a genuine interest. (rather than by three posers doing their utmost best to prove their penis extensions are bigger than those around them that are painted rustic red). You really are a prize size ignorant tosser
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2016 18:48:32 GMT
Your thread title was quite clear, but as is par for the course John v, nifty nick, and popcorn Peter pudding wanted to drag in their own usual brand of crap. Obviously, they should take a leaf out of dogshits book, buy caravans and bugger off. That way, the canals can be cared for by those who have a genuine interest. (rather than by three posers doing their utmost best to prove their penis extensions are bigger than those around them that are painted rustic red). You really are a prize size ignorant tosser And your a gullible twat who it turns out hasn't even been on a London canal but feels equipped to comment on the state of them. Pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Aug 23, 2016 19:03:00 GMT
I think we can all agree that the piss takers are in a minority, so why is the future of the waterways being determined by them? Or to put it another way why is Crt's plan for the future of the waterways basicly a knee jerk reaction to a small minority of boaters?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2016 19:11:17 GMT
I think we can all agree that the piss takers are in a minority, so why is the future of the waterways being determined by them? Or to put it another way why is Crt's plan for the future of the waterways basicly a knee jerk reaction to a small minority of boaters? They want to micro manage smaller parts of the waterways. Basically, they don't want boats using the whole 2000 miles. Ccers will cover parts most part timers won't bother with. Crt figure that getting rid of cc will enable them to shut down large parts of the system, leaving only the most popular and easily managed routes to deal with. CRT's simple but effective answer, is to not maintain the areas they would prefer us not to use. Parry stated that he had a 10 million quid surplus last year, in cash, and in the bank. After everything else had been accounted for (bar the maintenance, which he avoided talking about, even when questioned).
|
|