Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/12/12 in all areas

  1. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  2. It is true that there is a temporary wooden structure adjoining the brick lengthsman's "hovel" (6' x 6') that CRT are objecting to. They have told Danny George to remove it. He is permitted to put up a shed, but at some distance (about 15-20 metres). This makes operating his meat and vegetable shop just about impossible. CRT's reason is that the wooden structure detracts from a historic building. Were this really so.... true, there's been a hovel here since the late 19th century, and part of this brick building is original. But it has been left to it's own devices for decades, and as necessary much has been repaired in unsypathetic materials (machine made bricks) in the 1960s/1970s, so it's a bit like Trigger's broom! The building was in danger of collapsing when Danny arrived, and he has underpinned it to prevent this. CRT say they are wanting to help Danny keep his shop open, but it seems to be that he has to do what he's told, with little scope for common sense. CRT seem to forget that he is a customer - they certainly don't treat him as that, or consider his business needs. The canals need individualistic/idiosyncratic businesses, and Danny has done nothing to harm the "historic" building. Let's hope that CRT soon see how silly they are being.
    2 points
  3. Send the kids outside with no phones to play. That takes care of three devices.
    2 points
  4. The wire size, over a certain size becomes irrelevant. What is far more important in any low voltage high current system is the security and resistance of the connections. It will be far more difficult to make a low resistance connection with oversize cable (always assuming you can get 6mm crimps for them). I don't think the fashion for oversize cable is a good thing. The right size cable for the job is the proper solution.
    2 points
  5. I wasn't going to comment but as sometimes happens on this site people who should know better add comments which are ill informed and often downright wrong. Dan has a contract with originally BW and now C&RT, he pays rent for the site. Dan has all the relevant food hygiene and safety regulations covered and certificates to prove it. He runs a smallholding which is not at the lock and the food is sourced from there. I'm not going into details on an open forum but I can say because I do know that this year has without question been the worst of his life. I spoke to John Dodwell and he has refered the matter to Stuart Mills the C&RT property director. Hopefully Stuart will resolve the matter. Ken
    1 point
  6. Be very careful if the proprietor there offers you a free sample - it doesn't always end well (!) Sickle & Chalice Blog Post
    1 point
  7. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  8. The air vent slider will keep surcoming to gravity and closing with the stove mounted on its side like that, the reason why I think it keeps going out.
    1 point
  9. If there was a serious question they needed input on regarding future policy which would affect thousands of their licence holders, I would expect them to send a letter to the address they sent the licence discs to, with some info about the issue, and a link to an online poll site where we can offer some immediate feedback. Can it be more simple in 2012 for an organisation to interact with it's clientbase ?
    1 point
  10. A true CWDF thread if ever there were, abandoned boat missing owner moving someones boat club affiliation Middle East crisis mash up! Perfect
    1 point
  11. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  12. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  13. Alienating vast swathes of the boating community with statements like that helps no one Les. There are a lot of "boys with a toy" who are doing the best they can to help find a fair and workable solution, Alan Fincher is a good example. There are also a lot of people passionate about boating who for one reason or another cannot live aboard full time. Many of them struggle to fund their "toys". Generalisations like that are very unhelpful. I, for one, would never want to see the boating community split into them and us.
    1 point
  14. We all know the rules laid out for us when we get into boating. We all know the guidelines and limitations that we have to work within. We must pay a licence; have a BSS; have insurance; not overstay on public moorings; not hog the water point; not pollute the cut; and either have a mooring or be able to comply with the CC guidelines. If there are no moorings in the area in which we wish to moor/ live, and if we cannot genuinely CC in that area and keep our work/ family life intact, then it is wrong to say that we are entitled to flout the rules due to lack of service provision. Unless you have a designated mooring that is taken from you suddenly, I don't see that anyone can claim it's unfair that they want to be in one place that might already be saturated with boats and ergo because you cannot find a place, it's ok to just pitch up and ignore the CC rules and add to the problem because if there happened to be a mooring to be had, you'd take it. The resources as they are are finite, and just as with everything else in life, not everyone can have what they want all of the time, or they may have to wait some time to be able to get all of their ducks in a row. I don't agree with all of the CART/BW rules and their philosophies by any means; I think that there is a lot of scope for updating the current rules to become more up to date and inclusive of boaters with real-life issues, the year on year increase in liveaboards and the general progression of the lifestyles that people lead today that is very different to how it was historically. The change year on year in the usage of the waterways is real and should not be ignored by the people in power; and I think the rules in place need to reflect this. But ignoring the current rules is not the way to get this done. I believe that we all have a right to lobby for change, if we feel it is relevant and that we want it, and to speak out if we feel that the rules currently in place don't genuinely reflect the reality of owning a boat for the majority of owners, living on the water, or the usage of the canals. If many voices agree, and speak in unison, change will have to come. But the point is, the rules as they stand are clear, and something that we all, as boaters from all walks of life and using the canals in many different ways, knew about beforehand and signed up for. Bending or flouting the rules to suit our own circumstances or saying that things are unfair if our own situations change or that the rules don't suit us, is counter-productive and does the majority of other boaters a disservice. Flouting the CC rules will ultimately cause harm to all of the many CC'ers who are totally compliant with the letter and spirit or the rules, and this can only be a bad thing. If the rules suddenly changed and deviated greatly from the guidelines and protocols that I signed up for when I got my boat, so causing the life that I chose on the basis of those rules to suddenly became significantly harder or genuinely un-viable, I'd be the first to stand up and yell about it, and I think everyone else should do the same. But the rules have not changed significantly within the last x amount of time that most of us have been boaters. Our own situations might have changed, often through no fault of our own, but that doesn't mean that it's right or fair to expect the rules to bend to suit our own circumstances. If we show that we as a group cannot play nicely with the toys we have, and live within the rules set for us, those toys will be taken away, those rules will change, and those choices will be lost. For everyone. I wish that everyone would look at things objectively and with the view that if they cannot comply with the set rules, then they go another route. Even if that means making hard choices, and then stepping back and lobbying for change in the right ways.
    1 point
  15. Dean I think you have it backwards. A lot of peeps have life circumstances (e.g. a job in a fixed location, kids in a school, whatever) which prevent them from CCing. We all have to comply with the rules we agreed to when we applied for our licence. These broadly say if you can't arrange your life so you can CC, you must get a home mooring. So if you can't afford the home mooring, you can't afford the luxury of living on a boat. Arguing the rules are senseless or are unfair does not cut it. We are lumbered with them and have to comply with them or risk the consequences. Time to grow up and accept reality. MtB
    1 point
  16. I have just checked some of the seriously crap joints local to me and they all scored 5, so I guess it is all bollocks.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.