Do Owners of ex-working boats have special priveleges?

[Victor Vectis]

55 minutes ago, Goliath said:

But I know nothing. 

Are you Jon Snow?

[David Schweizer]

1 hour ago, nicknorman said:

Well a bit of a rant there David. Firstly, I would like to know if Trevor actually runs a business using his boat. Does he make a profit? Or is it just a hobby these days? I don't know, but I suspect possibly not. But it really doesn't matter too much to me or my point whether it is ex or not.

Could you point me to exactly which uninformed observations I have made about him, or retract that part of your rant please?

You should bear in mind that for the first significant part of this thread it was suspected that it wasn't Trevor driving, but anyway my point remains that just because he has been boating since the 1960s (which incidentally, so have I although not "commercially") etc etc, and just because he is considered competent, courteous and considerate (I wouldn't know, never met him) does NOT mean that he can never make a mistake, hit a gate a bit hard or whatever. Anyone who thinks that he must be perfect simply because he has an (ex or otherwise) working boat and has been around as long as I have, is deluded.

The thread title was perhaps a bit tongue in cheek in the mind of the author but it does seem as though in fact, it was factually spot on, with the possible exception of the ex.

Well if your recollection of what you said is that poor, perhaps it is you that is suffering the effects of advancing years rather than Trevor as you suggested in your earlier posts. and you continue with your usubtantiated and ill informed hypothesis in this latest post. 

Edited September 19, 2017 by David Schweizer

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

31 minutes ago, Victor Vectis said:

Are you Jon Snow?

Bastard of the North?

or News reader?

 

[nicknorman]

18 minutes ago, David Schweizer said:

Well if your recollection of what you said is that poor, perhaps it is you that is suffering the effects of advancing years rather than Trevor as you suggested in your earlier posts. and you continue with your usubtantiated and ill informed hypothesis in this latest post. 

So in fact you cannot cite any uninformed observations that I made. Not even one. How weird that you continue with your random attack on me. Though not entirely out of character it has to be said.

Kindly put up (the alleged uninformed observations), or shut up. I resent you making up stuff that I didn't say and then pretending to be outraged by it. Attention seeking par excellence.

Edited September 19, 2017 by nicknorman

[David Schweizer]

16 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

So in fact you cannot cite any uninformed observations that I made. Not even one. How weird that you continue with your random attack on me. Though not entirely out of character it has to be said.

Kindly put up (the alleged uninformed observations), or shut up. I resent you making up stuff that I didn't say and then pretending to be outraged by it. Attention seeking par excellence.

Oh, I can cite them, but if you think I am going to trawl through eight pages of posts and qoute them just to satisfy your inflated ego you can think again.

[nicknorman]

12 minutes ago, David Schweizer said:

Oh, I can cite them, but if you think I am going to trawl through eight pages of posts and qoute them just to satisfy your inflated ego you can think again.

Of course you aren't going to cite them. That is because they don't exist.

Anyway, let's be clear. You have a vague recollection that several days ago I said something you disapproved of. Several things actually. But you can't remember what they were or where I said it. And yet you are quite content to rant on about it in an attacking and accusational fashion.

As I said earlier, weird.

Edited September 19, 2017 by nicknorman

[Victor Vectis]

43 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

< snip > Attention seeking par excellence.

May I direct the learned poster to the comment made in post no 183, m'lud.

[nicknorman]

3 minutes ago, Victor Vectis said:

May I direct the learned poster to the comment made in post no 183, m'lud.

What have vegetables got to do with it?

[GUMPY]

Those with boats built before 1966 look down on us hobby boaters. We are not worthy..........

[Dave_P]

9 hours ago, Goliath said:

Bastard of the North?

or News reader?

 

Or the eminent epidemiologist who saved tens of thousands from cholera in Victorian London?

[David Schweizer]

11 hours ago, nicknorman said:

So in fact you cannot cite any uninformed observations that I made. Not even one. How weird that you continue with your random attack on me. Though not entirely out of character it has to be said.

Kindly put up (the alleged uninformed observations), or shut up. I resent you making up stuff that I didn't say and then pretending to be outraged by it. Attention seeking par excellence.

Since you sem to be unable to accept the existence of your unwarranted implications about someone who you had never heard of, let alone met, here are a few extracts from post made by you. Of course you always select your words very carefully, but it is clear to most people, that your comments are implying that Trevor may well suffer from age related conditions which could impair his ability to captain a boat.

Post 44  - "Anyway, I don't know Trevor but 2 things come to mind one of which is that if he were indeed driving (which seems in doubt) any late 70s person may have eyesight or    mental capacity issues. There is no licensing to drive a narrowboat, no medical required and so no mechanism to stop people boating who really shouldn't be"

Post 50 - " Of course you do. Everyone hates getting old and having their faculties malfunctioning. But pretending it doesn't happen is just silly."

Post 56 - " But the facts are that as age increases, so does the likelihood of impairment of faculties."

There are also a number of challenges from you as to whether Trevor is, or ever was, a commercial carrier, although you seem to have accepted that, on that issue, you were wrong

Edited September 20, 2017 by David Schweizer

[haggis]

1 hour ago, David Schweizer said:

Since you sem to be unable to accept the existence of your unwarranted implications about someone who you had never heard of, let alone met, here are a few extracts from post made by you. Of course you always select your words very carefully, but it is clear to most people, that your comments are implying that Trevor may well suffer from age related conditions which could impair his ability to captain a boat.

 

Not clear to me. I took Nicks comments to mean that those of us getting on in years could have health impairments which might prevent us taking actions which we might have take when we were younger. This is a true statement of fact. 

I don't know Trevor either (i fact, I had never heard of him until this thread) which I suppose makes me in some peoples eyes lacking in knowledge about canals. Is there anyone else I should be aware of to help me improve my canal knowledge and become one of the elite :-) ? That will probably never happen though as I am not  impressed by  old boats  and their owners. Each to his own. There is room for everyone on the canals no matter what type of boat they own.

 

haggis

[alan_fincher]

4 hours ago, Loddon said:

Those with boats built before 1966 look down on us hobby boaters. We are not worthy..........

I know it's tongue in cheek, but if you are right, I would have needed to look down on myself for the period I owned one 1995 build and one 1996 build!

In all seriousness though it is not like that - when we visited (for example) the HNBC gathering in Brownhills earlier this year, a significant number of the boats owned by HNBC members are non only "non historic" but also not even modern replicas or "remakes".  Some nodern boats are owned by people who have played a significant role in the period between the last long distance narrow boat trade ending in 1970, and the current day, but don't now own a "historic".

(When the Historic Narrow Boat Club migrated from being the Historic Narrow Boat Owners Club a few years back, any requirement that you owned one, part owned one, or were involved with a trust or other historic boat group was dropped - you would welcome to join with a Springer, a Hudson, or no boat at all)

[DRP]

18 minutes ago, haggis said:

 

. . . There is room for everyone on the canals no matter what type of boat they own.

 

haggis

It's not the boats, though, is it? It's the people in them.

The boats are fine; they may be old or new, they may be private ,or hire boats.

Some have very capable people in them; some have complete duffers. Some have nice people; some have absolute tw*ts.

Bit like Canal World Forum, really.

[David Schweizer]

27 minutes ago, haggis said:

Not clear to me. I took Nicks comments to mean that those of us getting on in years could have health impairments which might prevent us taking actions which we might have take when we were younger. This is a true statement of fact. 

 which I suppose makes me in some peoples eyes lacking in knowledge about canals. Is there anyone else I should be aware of to help me improve my canal knowledge and become one of the elite :-) ? That will probably never happen though as I am not  impressed by  old boats  and their owners. Each to his own. There is room for everyone on the canals no matter what type of boat they own.

 

haggis

Not at all, my concern was that someone else who had also never heard of him, chose to make inapropriate suggestions him based soley upon his age, something which you have not done.

Some of us (including Alan Fincher) have been around canals and boats since the 1960's and our first experience was operating old working boats. so we have a (perhaps) nostalgic recollection of them. There are sadly very few of the old working boatmen and women still with us, and even fewer still owning or working a boat. The fact that we remember them, and respect their ability is for us, I hope,  understandable.

[David Schweizer]

22 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

I know it's tongue in cheek, but if you are right, I would have needed to look down on myself for the period I owned one 1995 build and one 1996 build!

In all seriousness though it is not like that - when we visited (for example) the HNBC gathering in Brownhills earlier this year, a significant number of the boats owned by HNBC members are non only "non historic" but also not even modern replicas or "remakes".  Some nodern boats are owned by people who have played a significant role in the period between the last long distance narrow boat trade ending in 1970, and the current day, but don't now own a "historic".

(When the Historic Narrow Boat Club migrated from being the Historic Narrow Boat Owners Club a few years back, any requirement that you owned one, part owned one, or were involved with a trust or other historic boat group was dropped - you would welcome to join with a Springer, a Hudson, or no boat at all)

I was a founding joint club member when it was started in 1966. in those days it was named "The Narrowboat Owners Club" when the only requirement was the ownership of a Narrowboat. Of course in those days, there were no "replica" narrowboats so the need for the word "historic" was not needed.

But you already knew that

Edited September 20, 2017 by David Schweizer

[nicknorman]

2 hours ago, David Schweizer said:

Since you sem to be unable to accept the existence of your unwarranted implications about someone who you had never heard of, let alone met, here are a few extracts from post made by you. Of course you always select your words very carefully, but it is clear to most people, that your comments are implying that Trevor may well suffer from age related conditions which could impair his ability to captain a boat.

Post 44  - "Anyway, I don't know Trevor but 2 things come to mind one of which is that if he were indeed driving (which seems in doubt) any late 70s person may have eyesight or    mental capacity issues. There is no licensing to drive a narrowboat, no medical required and so no mechanism to stop people boating who really shouldn't be"

Post 50 - " Of course you do. Everyone hates getting old and having their faculties malfunctioning. But pretending it doesn't happen is just silly."

Post 56 - " But the facts are that as age increases, so does the likelihood of impairment of faculties."

There are also a number of challenges from you as to whether Trevor is, or ever was, a commercial carrier, although you seem to have accepted that, on that issue, you were wrong

Post 44 - as is clear to anyone who can comprehend basic English, having said I didn't know Trevor, why or how could I possibly have an opinion about the state of his faculties? Any normal person could see that the idea is ridiculous. My point was a general one that people who were excellent boaters in their prime, may eventually fall foul of failing faculties. Almost certainly will, unless they take the sensible decision to quit. I was thinking of car driving where there comes a point that someone makes the decision for you. I didn't say Trevor was such a person, you are just making up a silly interpretation to support your faux outrage.

post 50 - do you disagree that in general, when people get quite old their faculties are at risk of eventually fading? If so, can I have some of your elixir please. This was a general and IMO obviously correct statement. As per post 44 I have no idea of the state of Trevor's faculties and only a person lacking in any logic and comprehension would think so. Or with an agenda with a need to support a random rant of false outrage.

post 56 ditto. You are quite irrational if you think such a statement is somehow a slight on Trevor. None of these posts imply that Trevor is suffering from some age-related impairments. It implies that he could be. Clearly for someone in their 80s this is a possibility But since I have never met him, how could I possibly know whether he does or not?

i did not "challenge" whether Trevor had been a commercial operator, I asked the question. Repeatedly, but of course the cult followers consider such information sacred and it took a while to get a clear answer. Knowledge is power. Although whether he is still a commercial operator in the generally accepted sense remains unanswered.

Now could you please identify the "uninformed observations" I made about Trevor, or retract your libellous accusations.

[David Schweizer]

33 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

Post 44 - as is clear to anyone who can comprehend basic English, having said I didn't know Trevor, why or how could I possibly have an opinion about the state of his faculties? Any normal person could see that the idea is ridiculous. My point was a general one that people who were excellent boaters in their prime, may eventually fall foul of failing faculties. Almost certainly will, unless they take the sensible decision to quit. I was thinking of car driving where there comes a point that someone makes the decision for you. I didn't say Trevor was such a person, you are just making up a silly interpretation to support your faux outrage.

post 50 - do you disagree that in general, when people get quite old their faculties are at risk of eventually fading? If so, can I have some of your elixir please. This was a general and IMO obviously correct statement. As per post 44 I have no idea of the state of Trevor's faculties and only a person lacking in any logic and comprehension would think so. Or with an agenda with a need to support a random rant of false outrage.

post 56 ditto. You are quite irrational if you think such a statement is somehow a slight on Trevor. None of these posts imply that Trevor is suffering from some age-related impairments. It implies that he could be. Clearly for someone in their 80s this is a possibility But since I have never met him, how could I possibly know whether he does or not?

i did not "challenge" whether Trevor had been a commercial operator, I asked the question. Repeatedly, but of course the cult followers consider such information sacred and it took a while to get a clear answer. Knowledge is power. Although whether he is still a commercial operator in the generally accepted sense remains unanswered.

Now could you please identify the "uninformed observations" I made about Trevor, or retract your libellous accusations.

So an individual person in their 80's is not included in the term "anyone", even though their name is the only one quoted in the same sentence/paragraph?

As for your final statement, all your observations about trevor are "uninformed"  as you have already admitted that you do not know him. You, perhaps, also need to look up the legal definition of Libel. To suceed in any Civil Action you would need to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that the published statement had damged the (allegedly) libelled person's reputation. I suggest you need to look in the mirror!

 

Edited September 20, 2017 by David Schweizer

[haggis]

46 minutes ago, David Schweizer said:

Not at all, my concern was that someone else who had also never heard of him, chose to make inapropriate suggestions him based soley upon his age, something which you have not done.

Some of us (including Alan Fincher) have been around canals and boats since the 1960's and our first experience was operating old working boats. so we have a (perhaps) nostalgic recollection of them. There are sadly very few of the old working boatmen and women still with us, and even fewer still owning or working a boat. The fact that we remember them, and respect their ability is for us, I hope,  understandable.

Oh yes, it is understandable. I too respect the ability of several older people in many walks of life to have done what they did and what in many cases they continue to do. However, to transfer this admiration of old boaters and their boats to younger people who choose to have an old boat  stretches my imagination somewhat.  In my eyes they are "posing  boats" and yes, I know several such owners. Doesn't bother me. Folk can pose with whatever sort of boat they like but please don't give the impression that if we weren't around in the "good old days" then we are not quoted and shouldn't have the audacity to comment on our "betters".

haggis

[nicknorman]

6 minutes ago, David Schweizer said:

So an individual person in their 80's in not included in the term "anyone"

Of course. But I didn't use the term "anyone". Why do you keep making up stuff that I didn't say? Perhaps the clue is in your earlier comment "Of course you always select your words very carefully" - you are desperate to make out I said something I didn't, but because I chose words that don't support your accusations, you are sulking.

I did say "any late 70s person may..." . That means any late 70s person may. It doesn't mean "All late 70s people do...". Perhaps you don't have English as your first language?

[David Schweizer]

Just now, nicknorman said:

Of course. But I didn't use the term "anyone". Why do you keep making up stuff that I didn't say? Perhaps the clue is in your earlier comment "Of course you always select your words very carefully" - you are desperate to make out I said something I didn't, but because I chose words that don't support your accusations, you are sulking.

I did say "any late 70s person may..." . That means any late 70s person may. It doesn't mean "All late 70s people do...". Perhaps you don't have English as your first language?

I hope that Xenophobic comment is not based upon my European surname.

[Dave Payne]

Jesus, how tedious!

 

[junior]

F**king h*ll people. He hit a gate a bit hard, by accident. Who cares, it happens.

[sirweste]

8 minutes ago, Dave Payne said:

Jesus, how tedious!

 

Agreed. There's a fantastic messenger function that folk could bicker on y'know

[chubby]

The posts above finally bring some wisdom to the thread . Who gives a shit . Canal hardware gets banged into everyday & everywhere . Usually where i am !  It happens , mistakes happen , people are people and no matter how experienced one is there will be errors . I bet strong wind for instance can make an experienced boater look foolish from time to time . 

Sounds like this old chap has spent a lifetime on the canal . Im happy he s still boating - good luck to him . 

As for  the  bickering -  it's embarrassing watching a pair of intelligent & knowledgable people going " Sir sir - he said .... but sir - he started it " .

Is all this really that important FFS ?