robtheplod

I watched this and can't understand that the narrowboat didn't see the canoeist. He certainly is looking for him when he gets near the bridge. I'd say both at fault. Narrowboater i think did see him but assumed he'd get out the way and canoeist is a little silly to sit there on the narrowest part of the canal watching the boat come at him.... ps this film looks old?

Could it be those tied up tightly one end forcing the angle as the level dropped?

I think this is it:

maybe he's hoping to get lucky?

They could have a very small attic space with that internal height... be quite useful I'd think!

maybe boaters should start invoicing CRT for scratches on their boats caused by overgrown vegetation!

Whats the deal with overhanging branches etc... are boaters permitted to cut these themselves?

8ft seems a bit of a waste? surely better lower it for better bridge clearance?

I thought the same... our narrowboat is 6ft 7in in the centre and 6ft 3in along the sides.....

The BBC sell off a lot of its content. It has another company BBC Studios which is a private company and owns most shows, sells them abroad. It also pays lots of the higher stars from this such as Graham Norton so they don't have to declare it. That's fine Ian, you watch BBC with my blessing!

Thats fine. Can i ask what other channels you are able to watch? I don't hate the BBC, I just think they are funded in a way that gives them a grossly unfair advantage in this modern age. This leads to them being a little bit preachy and arrogant amongst broadcasters as they don't have to try. If people are happy to pay their licence fee just for no adverts then thats fine - they can do this much cheaper with other services, but i understand that many people still hold the BBC dear to them from years gone by...

The BBC need to find new ways to fund themselves. Advertising or subscription. Either way, the laws on TV licensing need to be scrapped. We're constantly told how great the BBC is and how popular their programmes are etc.... if this is true then people won't mind subscribing to them and advertisers will come flocking..... the truth is though, the BBC knows that whatever happens, funds will reduce and hence why it fights tooth and nail to keep its excessive income and unfair advantage over other broadcasters. True

This has been discussed and its almost impossible for the BBC to obtain this information due to GDPR. It wont do any good also as most people who connect to the internet do so using variable IP's - most ISP's are reluctant to give users a static IP unless they ask for it.

The BBC assumes everyone still watches terrestrial TV and everyone should have a licence. This assumption dates back to the days when that was true - if you had a TV you needed a licence as all you could watch was terrestrial. The problem I have with the BBC is they have not moved on from the 70's, mainly as they don't have to, they have an almost guaranteed income until 2027. They could for instance force people to enter their TV licence number to get into iPlayer, this would stop any illegal viewing, yet they choose not to - allowing instead on an easily faked email address entry. Many moons back TV's had a subscription card slot - I can't recall the name of it (CAM?), but it made scrambling of TV signals simple so you could have subscription terrestrial TV - something that is not possible now. The BBC alone were responsible for this being dropped as it put pressure on them to go down the subscription route. The BBC like the licence model as it is. I'm fine with the BBC (Capita) enforcing the TV licence, as long as they realise that a rapidly growing population now view content in a way that does not require a licence and they need to accept this. I object to being assumed to be a guilty person in the eyes of the BBC simply because I'm not interested in viewing their content. The number of licence fee payers is dropping rapidly as youngsters don't pay (they dont need to as they generally always watch catchup) and more older people are discovering the convenience of catchup services and cancelling. More people are also waking up to the fact that TV licensing is not the 'scary big brother' that the BBC likes to make it out to be, its just sales people trying to get you to buy their product through legal menacing means that other companies would be in court for. The licence is hopelessly out of date for modern times and has some truly silly bits. You can watch TV on your phone away from your home if you have a licence, but if you plug it into charge then you're breaking the law..... how silly... It won't be too long before the public decide on how viable the licence fee model is, and this will be well before 2027 at the current rate......

Detector vans were a myth. There has never been a single prosecution as a result of these vans. Ex-employees have also stated they didn't have anything in them... The BBC now use a database of addresses with and without a licence. If you don't have a licence you are automatically assumed to be watching illegally, which is no longer the case and shows the BBC's mentality.

Thats fine.... you're paying £159 a year for the privilege

Indeed, but to be fair you're getting it for free so some payback!

You have to watch them, but there tends to be less of them. If you're watching older programmes then sometimes there's no ads at all....

Yes you get the whole range of services. it really is the simplest way of viewing online.

Get a Roku as in the link earlier... easy to use and gives your TV everything it needs if you also have WiFi on the boat?