Mike Todd

be a bit of an ask seeing as how it was admitted on here that it was deliberate!

Not wise: if a cyclist (or a pedestrian) failed to spot your hose and as a result sustained significant injury, you could be held liable, especially if you were judged to have erected the trap deliberately. Remember that even if the injured party were considered a trespasser you have a duty of care.

Yes - it is important with any statistical analysis to determine a priori what is your null hypothesis - in this case you cannot 'prove' a particular opinion, but you can show that some other value is very unlikely. That is what you are doing - it is very unlikely that there is anywhere near a majority in favour. The use of he analysis is unaffected by whether the actual rate is 90% or 75% - the reaction will be the same anywhere in this range.

But some of us can remember what towpaths were like when that is all that they were! You don't have to be all that old, in canal experience terms, either.

Actually even that is harder than might be imagined since compliance is difficult (even the census - see other thread - cannot get 100%) In most situations, those who fail to make a return, even a DK are a biased sample. Since most national elections are quite close (as you have pointed out) it is possible that the relatively small number of those who do not take the vote seriously make up the difference between the estimate and the reality.

The last time (around six years ago) was slightly different. Limehouse lockies were much happier with mobile phone and we had real problems with VHF as we neared the lock coming downstream. Interference from illegal operators made it all but useless - we were told that this was 'normal'. Probably best to have both just in case.

I believe that there was quite a debate between politicians and the statisticians about whether a census was still required in the light of the observations such as yours above, especially in view of the cost. However, as I understand it, the experts argued that it is still important to reset the baseline every decade as many of the subsequent calculations are based on changes that may or may not drift away from the baseline. As an example, in the process of changing electricity supplier for a property we originally bought 30 years ago, we found that British Gas (sic) had a postcod

'So you haven't used a one inch map, then. I do still have quite a collection but only as museum pieces, really. Fill in the gap between NLS and current maps. (on line)

Is it not anyway for Limehouse to Brentford - not needed for Brentford upstream?

certainly can commend LH

As it stands I would have thought that allowing the use of existing bins would not be cost effective especially as usage levels are low. CaRT (meaning boaters) would have to pay on the basis that every bin might have such waste in it even though only a few actually had any.

When did you last use a one inch map?

If it really were 80% then there would not be much room left for anything sticky!

Oh, I am sure they'll fit you in, just so long as you can get through Aubrey's and the diamond locks.

As an argument you could equally 'ask why less than pump out customers?'