Slow and Steady
-
Posts
538 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by Slow and Steady
-
-
30 minutes ago, The Happy Nomad said:
Ok if you want to get pedantic about words then.
Are you suggesting that only immigrants to the UK would steal from their employer.
Yes stealing encompasses the notion of making unauthorised personal telephone calls at your employers expense.
Im not looking for anything to shoot at, it was you introduced the issue when you raised the cultural aspect.
You are ridiculous, go and pick at someone else. lol
-
20 minutes ago, The Happy Nomad said:
You are talking cobblers if you are suggesting that only immigrants employed in the UK defraud their employers.
Is that really what you are suggesting, and if not what is it you are?
I'm suggesting that viewing it as fraud is missing the point. It was not fraud, it was cultural misunderstanding based on "if I can get away with it, it's not my fault you're an idiot." I don't object actually, it's not racist and I don't suggest that at all, you just like to look for an angle to shoot from.
Here's another. As young travellers in 1981 we arrived at Cairo airport at midnight. Taxi to the hotel - £50 - you must be joking! - No, it's a long way, £50. and so on. Daft enough to pay it? Fine. After 10 minutes - OK, I'll show you where to catch the bus and which bus to get on. I'll talk to the driver for you too so he knows where you want to get off. !0p. It's a cultural thing. EVERYTHING in Egypt was like that, it was a really fun place to be, I spent 2 months there, the people are LOVELY, but it's different. A fool and his money are easily parted on every single transaction, everything must be bartered for. In the UK we were used to going into a shop, seeing the price and paying it. One is not better. To notice and discuss that different cultures have different ways of looking at things is not racist. It would be pretty stupid to judge different cultures by one's own. That would be racist but there's no judgement from me.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:
Oh, and in every office I ever worked in, everybody used the office phone for personal calls, including abroad. Not just those of a "non-UK culture and different religion". Good grief, that's almost as bad as Waterworks' little bit of covert racism.
Now you're being silly, it was a cultural thing. Do you have a problem with admitting there are different cultures around the world and some of them moved lock stock and barrel to the UK? I don't. A simple meeting of different cultures. I don't think you'd have lasted long running up a phone bill that was 20x your wages in a tiny company that didn't make that much profit in a month. Nor do I think you'd have been baffled that it was a problem, nor blamed the company for letting you near a phone.
9 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:Those gaming the system have finally learned from their "betters", to the detriment of us all.
And that, was my point. Everyone's at it so it's no surprise that CCer's do the same in London without any guilt - it's normalised behaviour.
10 minutes ago, Paul C said:I suspect the board are far from satisfied with the non-movement of a great many of CCers, especially in London, but they're simply outresourced and unable to properly police a deliberately vague piece of law, so they continue to renew licences for the marginal cases and focus on a handful of boaters where they can clearly demonstrate they're disobeying the rules. If there was a neat solution to the problem, it would have been fixed by now, but there isn't.
2,000 licences x £1,000 = £2M. They have the resources to police it but would rather put the money in the coffers. It's a choice.
-
13 minutes ago, IanD said:
I'm pretty sure that last time this subject came up you had all the same pro-moorer arguments and it took a lot of prodding to get you to admit that you were either a member of the NBTA or at least agreed with their principles -- if that wasn't you then I apologise right now. Was it you?
I'm not a member and know nothing about their principles EXCEPT that apparently they get the blame for anything connected with CCers that isn't approved of. IF they are a group that try and bend the rules into "rights" then in principle I'm not in favour - as explained earlier this historically always ends up with rules being tightened unnecessarily to everyone's detriment. In general I believe people should follow the rules and be nice, but then I don't live in London and recognise that with the overcrowding there, those that do end up with nowhere to moor, just like the holiday people so what can they do? Yep, I know, move out of London and that would be what I'd do. No need to apologise, it's probably just another case of you deciding what I think so that you can argue with me to make your point.
22 minutes ago, IanD said:How much boats move isn't a question of whether they satisfy *me* or not, it's whether they "satisfy the board"
Exactly, I'm glad we agree on that. If those boats are licenced, the board must be satisfied?
23 minutes ago, IanD said:I find it impossible to believe that they are all "following the rules" -- and several have admitted that when I've talked to them, including "waiting for engine repairs" for more than a year (though of course the parts were available), and the "encourage coots to nest in tyre fenders" trick, or just plain "even if CART check it takes so long to take action I just ignore it".
I refer you to the first part of this post. If they play by the rules - nowhere to moor. I'm afraid it's likely to be a case of if you can't beat them join them anarchy on the London canals. Before you incorrectly opine that I approve of all that and start arguing with me - NO I DON'T. Good, that's clear. What I do is recognise reality. That's the reality isn't it? You don't like it, 2,000 London CCers disagree and the board are satisfied with their behaviour. But you say - it's against the spirit of the rules. They say - sod the spirit, we're trying to have a life here and if we have to duck, dive and circumvent unenforceable rules to do it, them that's the rule's fault.
A friend of mine used to employ the locals who were bought up in a different culture, a non-UK culture with a different religion, but they were the majority of the population, just the locals. So, one day he finds he had a £2,000 telephone bill (this is the early eighties). It turned out one of his apprentice employees had been phoning his relatives abroad. Just a young guy so my friend went to have it out with his father. The father could not understand his point of view. It was all my friend's fault for putting temptation in his way. He should have banned overseas calls/locked the telephone. What did he expect! To him, it was like leaving the keys in your Jag and expecting nobody to steal it. Maybe he had a point, sort of. Never trust anyone?
And, there we have what the UK has become or is fast moving towards. It's acceptable for people and companies to cheat basically, unless they get caught or someone does something about it. Eon have a department set up absolutely to avoid repaying money they've managed to cheat their customers out of. I know this. It took me 3 months and threats to inform the fraud squad to move them from "we owe you nothing" to a £3,500 rebate. That was hard, hard work. I feel sorry for anyone who can't defend themselves against that lot and their ilk. Insurance companies do the same. Banks attract investment then immediately cut the rates. Cheating has been normalised.
What's the point of all the above? I'm trying to say that you should not be surprised, in the UK today, that a large section of society do not give a sh!t about rules and life has taught them to be like this. It's a sorry state that we find ourselves in. Our politicians are not blameless in this drift away from the British notion of fair play, but it is what it is.
-
1 hour ago, IanD said:
There are long stretches of 48 hour moorings which are permanently full of moored boats which hardly move, if ever, so I fail to see how designating more moorings as 48 hour would help -- in fact even the stretches near Paddington with "no mooring" signs are full of similar boats. It doesn't matter how many short-term/48-hour/VMs there are if they are just blocked by habitual overstayers.
Do you know that these people haven't got CRTs blessing to do exactly that? Do you know that CRT don't point disabled people to these moorings as accessible for them? I don't, but I also don't know otherwise. Genuine question - why do you think they are able to do this? Why do you think CRT don't section 8 the lot of them?
31 minutes ago, IanD said:You're the one who started using "entitled" -- knowing exactly what it means (an insult), or you think it does -- not me.
So why are you so reactionary towards it and why are you so sure I'm only referring to those on one side of this despite me saying otherwise? If you think it's so bad to use this term for both sides I think you should have a good look at the veiled insults you merrily throw around this forum towards anyone that doesn't agree with you and even those like myself that you imagine (yes I know what that means
). don't agree with you.
31 minutes ago, IanD said:We've had exactly this discussion before and it's very clear which side of the argument -- essentially, the NBTA one -- you believe in. It's equally clear which side I stand -- that boaters should obey the CCing/mooring rules, not do what suits them regardless
Don't tell me what I think, that's purely your prejudices showing.
And that's the point...
My main argument with you revolves around you making assumptions about what I think, then arguing with them. It's insulting and I will not stop correcting your false assumptions.
I have sympathy for anyone unable to find a mooring be they liveaboard CCers that don't move enough to satisfy you but apparently do move enough to satisfy the board, or those on holiday. I'm pretty sure the London mooring situation is a PITA for both.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, IanD said:
I suggest you make your argument using facts instead of insults
Point me to these insults. You're building a straw man here Ian. In fact
15 minutes ago, IanD said:entitled (go and look up the definition)
is patronising and insulting.
14 minutes ago, IanD said:The problem is that the mooring rules are not enforced by CART and are largely ignored by those who find it convenient to do so -- which is pretty much your definition of "entitled", isn't it? 😉
Yes it is, where have I remotely suggested otherwise?
-
9 minutes ago, IanD said:
Yes it does apply to both sides -- and I said "commonly referred to" because those are aggressive terms often used by those on one side of the argument, just like you use "entitled" as an insult to people you don't agree with 😉
I'm not "promoting" any conflict (of interests), I very much wish there wasn't one -- but there clearly is, as your posts keep demonstrating on one side of the argument and posts from others (me included) demonstrate on the other.
I'm promoting nothing other than giving some thought to the "other" side as it were, whichever side you take. By that, I don't mean stating their case then arguing against it. Both sides are displaying entitlement IMO which in both cases is unreasonable. I don't have a side so I disagree/agree with both. What I disagree with is taking intransigent positions and repeating them ad nauseum.
Seems like the main problem is lack of short term moorings for those passing through. I have to admit I did a double take reading about the existence of 14 day visitors moorings! What the heck is the point of that? Does it just mean a stretch with bollards or rings? Hardly surprising that with the same time restrictions as any old part of the towpath + plus the irresistible bollards/rings that they are constantly full up! Is it possible that merely designating chunks of these as 48 hour would be helpful?
-
2 hours ago, jddevel said:
Told me to turn it off in a most unpleasant manner.
Ooooh - red rag to a bull to me. I'd have left it running all day until 7.59pm whether I needed to or not.
Or I'd have repeatedly asked him to rephrase that until he got the message that he needed to ask nicely to have any hope of getting his wish.
However, I think running generators within 1/2 mile of anyone else is a bit rude all things considered. Obnoxious things. A built in diesel one is ok, at least you're mainly annoying yourself.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, DShK said:
I couldn't be upset at them either way, they did leave me with 400 litres of fuel!
You win some, you loose some.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, Goliath said:
I’d be tempted to give them a ring and ask if they’re able to make any sort of a refund.
The worst they can say is no.
I would have gone without a license for the 2 days.
I don't think it's that simple, when the previous owner applies for their refund CRT ask the date the boat changed hands, so you need to both agree the official date for that.
-
2 hours ago, IanD said:
As usual, you using derogatory terms like "entitled" for people you don't agree with doesn't help
Yup, but applying it quite fairly to both "sides", if you took it to mean just the holiday bod's that's your point scoring deliberate misinterpretation at work.
And, well, you try to hide it by quoting that it's other people using these terms, but you do that so often I can only assume you're keen to inflame and promote your "conflict"? I guess you would have no problem if I wrote "often referred to as entitled". If you expect others not to bite back, stop doing it yourself, you can't have your cake and eat it.
3 hours ago, IanD said:often referred to as "continuous moorers" or "towpath squatters" or other derogatory terms
-
I think that's rather bad luck TBH, when I bought my latest boat the previous owner was refunded for the part month and I wasn't charged for it so between us we got a free month.
I bet you did it on line, if you phoned them they'd almost certainly have suggested you start the licence at the beginning of the next month, they're not all bad. They insisted on that when I licenced mine as "it wouldn't be fair to charge me for an incomplete month". TBH I expected them to charge us both for that month, their attitude was a nice surprise.
Have you tried speaking to them? I would expect they'd sort it out if you're pleasant and calm about it, but not if you rant.
-
3
-
-
16 minutes ago, IanD said:
Generally speaking, the second group who move around (and may also have home moorings) often pay more for the privilege of using the canals and tend to follow the rules on mooring/CCing, and resent the first group (often referred to as "continuous moorers" or "towpath squatters" or other derogatory terms) who they see as not following the rules, and blocking moorings for those who do want to move around. The first group (see Slow and Steady's comments above, which show a certain mindset...) feel they're being unfairly persecuted by CART, after all why should they have to move on so that well-off "entitled" boaters can go on holiday?
Gosh, so many assumptions regarding one "type of boater" resenting another and being in conflict...
2 minutes ago, IanD said:That's what I said. The basic conflict is between those who basically want to live on the canals in essentially one place and not move, and those who do want to travel around the system regardless of whether they hire a boat for a week, own a boat and spend part of the time on it and part on land, or liveaboard and cruise full time.
What conflict? I suggest to you that the vast majority of boaters are not in conflict with one another in any way. It's only the entitled on both sides that are in any sort of conflict and even then, conflict is rather over-egging it isn't it? It's not a war, it's people finding it difficult to find a mooring in exceptionally high use areas whether they be liveaboard locals or on holiday. Frustrating perhaps but it's nobody's fault really, we all have equal right to moor on the towpath. If people were taking p1ss as much as claimed, CRT would be doing something about it but they're not are they? Even when it's a continuous line of boats that would be cheap and easy to police. You have to conclude that they are quite happy and just pay lip service to those that complain about it. The nearest they get is describing it as a "challenge".
-
2 minutes ago, magnetman said:
The discussion is about a group of people who seem to think that market economy does not or should not apply to them.
Also we have a canal system which -apparently- needs more funding.
It seems the obvious solution to charge money for towpath moorings which are in high demand.
This is what the original topic was about.
Yes people come to London to seek their fortune that's nothing new but why then complain about having to pay some accomodation costs?
What is it about boats that mean they should not be subject to normal market forces? I don't get it.
I agree that it seems obvious to charge for tow-path mooring in LONDON. It's a special case. I can't see a problem doing this either, after all CRT have many towpath moorings that they rent out all over the system.
There used to be many ways you could live a simple slow life quite legally. Cheap rent, council houses and low paid jobs actually used to pay enough to live on without going cap in hand to "social security". It's quite insulting to suggest like someone just oop there^ did that there are a million+ unfilled "jobs" so nobody has the excuse. Many of those jobs are part time, most of them do not pay enough to live on and leave you relying on tax credits or whatever the name for social security is nowadays so why the hell would anybody work 40 hours a week when their income would be exactly the same if they didn't work at all? OK, I would because I'm bright enough to rise up to better things but a lot of people are not, that's their level. Feck it, I wouldn't work either. Added to the fact that when that crappy job comes to a halt for whatever reason, there is a huge delay penalty getting back on the old king cole it's a big risk to take a low paid insecure job at all.
-
2
-
-
11 minutes ago, MtB said:
There is an element of this I think, new boaters angry with the world because they were denied buying a house coming onto the water. This was ME to a tee 45 years ago!
I have also on several occasions encountered new boaters surprised to discover/be told there are any rules at all, who think the canals are natural and got put there by God's almighty hand for them to use however they wish. All of whom had assumed it would be fine to pick themselves a secluded spot on the towpath and settle in, and no-one would bother them provided their spot was suitably 'out of the way'.
I think this is a lot of peoples blind hope. Deciding to live on a boat is a sort of desperation for many people, maybe not financial desperation, maybe "Jeez I've had enough I just want to get away and chill" sort of desperation. Perhaps during divorce when you realise that half the pie ain't going to buy you a house it looks like a great alternative. That was me anyway. It's quite disappointing when you discover that Doh! tens of thousands of other people had the same idea and there are rules. I think to an extent this comes from the rather cut-off way people live in houses. You buy a house, you pay the bills, nobody bothers you, nobody comes around checking that you're keeping to the rules, you just get on with life in your castle.
It's fair to say that the majority of the UK population live nowhere near a canal. I was in my late 50's and had never seen a lock and I'd guess most people would have no idea about canals, rules, infrastructure, licences etc. Why would they? Even for bods like me who sailed all there lives and consider themselves quite boaty - absolutely no idea until I did my research.
And what about this - all those folk living in London might very well have perfectly good morals and consider that frankly they aren't hurting anyone so what's the fuss? Entitled? Maybe, but from their point of view perhaps those that bluster that it isn't fair that they can't find a mooring easily while on their holidays or that they can't row their boats without looking where they are going and those "slums" should be cleared to make their comparatively privileged lives more convenient are the ones exhibiting entitlement.
Just discussing, no skin in this game, I hate London personally.
-
3
-
-
Please crack on with your jokes, they always make me snigger, mainly because you just know they'll go right over some peoples heads and it'll be time to munch some popcorn as the thicko's get in a huff. You should be proud rather than offended by the reaction to the swan vestas joke IMO - gotcha!
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, TheBiscuits said:
How does planned preventative maintenance stop flash flooding that takes out chunks of infrastructure? Never mind CRT, there are many governments who would be interested in a sensible answer to this question.
Er, because it's nothing new? Weird weather events have been with us all my 60 year life. I remember it snowing on my birthday in June in the 60's in Rugby for example.
What has changed is the locals on the ground that had the knowledge to react before things got out of control have been sacked and replaced by a map on a computer. Not just CRT, it's the new way. I used to meet an old Guy in the Fens (Mildenhall) who had been laid off but was constantly badgered when odd places and homes were flooded because nobody knew where all the odd local sluices were except him. He'd offered to educate them but there was nobody to educate and they simply didn't understand how it all worked as a system. Can't remember whether he's worked for EA or the local council but his job had simply disappeared. Poor fellow was about 80 and they were still bugging him.
-
5 hours ago, Ray T said:
the damaging effects of climate change are growing more frequent
Eh? What a cop out! It's totally pathetic to use this as an excuse for lack of preventative maintenance.
-
1 hour ago, Tony Brooks said:
I suspect that just taking the figure from the shoreline will be fairly close but I can't say that with any certainty. If you want a quick and dirty figure just increase the bollard figure by 10%.
Thanks, I suspect the same, it'll be ball park and for now that's fine. I'll know if it's 50, 100, 200 or 500Ah. That will be a great overview. THEN I can worry about either cutting that down by changing my behaviour, building a system to store and systems to charge that storage or a bit of both but it all depends on usage. I'll always err on the safe side so I have no need to push anything to it's limits. Who knows, I might find it's impossible to live as I like to while generating my own power in which case I might abandon the whole idea and stay in the marina, though it would be nice if that were choice rather than necessity, I might pee the marina off and get chucked out! (not really)
1 hour ago, Tony1 said:A while back Alan de Enfield posted a listing for an energy monitoring plug- it plugs into your 240v socket
I looked at that, realised they all extend upwards from the plug and as my sockets are all just under the gunnels I couldn't plug the beggars in! If not for that I'd be doing this to break down the total usage a bit and when I find it's alarmingly high I'll probably have to buy a short extension to enable that. But first things first.
1 hour ago, Tony1 said:you do seem to have a lot of hardware,
Yes and it gets a lot of use. I don't think any of it is alarming in it's wattage, it's more the long hours constant use adding up. I know from experience that a 12V fridge might only draw 4A but when it's on full time 24/7 even switching on and off it adds up. Then there's the inverter, I think mine is 2A on standby and probably burns more in use so there's another battery a day. Yep, could be an unliveable total but I'm not in the best of health and get a lot of pleasure from making and mixing music on ze computer. Cost peanuts and is better quality than a multi-million pound studio was in the 80's 90's. Computers - got to embrace them. I make tracks with people around the world, I've just been working with a singer in Argentina. I've got a b-side out with a singer in America. I've made a few tracks with a lady drummer from Germany, a UK singer and an Italian Bass player. I've made a few tracks with a singer/guitarist from a tiny French Island off the East African coat. It's just for fun, it's impossible to make money like this these days - 20,000 tracks are uploaded to Spotify every day... but musicians are nice, well behaved, polite, encouraging people and it beats watching telly.
-
1 hour ago, Goliath said:
What’s a neural network?
Just googled it, and it blew my brain more than trying to fathom out solar panels.
It's the future, they learn. Just set 'em off and wait.
-
31 minutes ago, Goliath said:
I thought so too, an odd post.
How do these robots work?Would a human write that and then just feed it into whatever and it then gets delivered to wherever ?
Try this. https://app.inferkit.com/demo
I put in "Longer boats up North" and got
Much of the Pacific Northwest has been welcoming them, or at least reducing the cost.With the exception of Alaska and Hawaii, there’s been a reduction in the cost of registration.try "I bought a narrowboat because". I got...I bought a narrowboat because the world is so big and interesting and the whole world to see. Some people, upon hearing about my ambitions and ventures, roll their eyes and say "vague plans for the future are always a red flag"Starting a sentence is a good way to try it. -
2 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:
The Travelpower IS an alternator.
I don't think you were explicit but as I read your question you wanted to know your total power requirement when you are OFF grid. Otherwise, there is no point in even doing the calculations. The mains and battery charger will supply all your loads, just as they do now. It is only an issue when off grid.
Travelpowers are engine driven alternators having a 230V AC output so normally charge whatever batteries you have via a mains battery charger or lithium mains charge controller.
I don't see why you seem to be ignoring the charging side of the calculations unless you intend to stay on shore power, but your talk of a Travelpower seems to contradict that. Ignore charging and destroy batteries, but probably not as fast with lithiums as with lead acids.
I answered the best as I understood things so I don't think I can try to help any further.
Tony, I simply want to know what my power requirements are right now as they will not change when I'm off grid. I don't understand why my equipment would be using a different amount of power off grid. Please explain. I understand that power would be derived from batteries and there will be losses in conversion which was part of the original question.
Yes Travel power's are engine driven alternators but they are not like 12V alternators are they? They are designed for continuous high load unlike a regular 12V alternator that from all I've read will cook when you try and suck it's max amps out continuously. I was trying to make that distinction.
I'm not ignoring the charging side of the equation, - how can I possibly plan that if I don't know the requirements One thing at a time eh? Start at the beginning. I know for a fact that if I started posting about charging your first reply would be "How much power do you use, do a power audit". That's all I'm trying to do, but I'm answering all the charging questions as best I can simply because it's impolite to ignore people who seem to be trying to help.
I'm merely trying to find out roughly how much power I would need to suck out of 12V batteries to maintain my hooked up lifestyle. Once I know that I can think about bank size and how I'd charge them, or I can think about how I could reduce my requirements. Any charging plans would be peeing in the wind at this point don't you think?
Sorry if I've appeared to be rude, but I do know what my question was and I really didn't want to get into charging at this point. Instead of that we have a page of people querying my charging plans, pointing out the errors in a plan I haven't even more than vaguely thought about and me trying my best to steer it back to converting bollard power to battery power. Sorry again, I thought it was a simple enough question!
-
8 minutes ago, nicknorman said:
However, whilst I get 100A for a while, the Combi heats up and the current gradually decreases. About 65A continuous is as much as I can get, and that is with the device in the engine room (well ventilated). I’m not entirely sure there isn’t a problem with one of the fans, but anyway best to check that you can actually get a continuous 120A from your charger.
Interesting. Mine's a Victron Combi and 15 years old, I wonder if these things were designed assuming LA batteries where the high draw would be limited. I think the domestic alt is 140A so yes, looks like I might be better combining the two rather than thrashing one of them, I can limit the max charge with dip switches ostensibly to suit the battery bank size so it's an option. Thanks for that info.
-
Nick is an AI bot.
London boaters fight for moorings
in General Boating
Posted
I was trying not to exaggerate. Google thinks there are 4,000 boats on London canals and half have permanent moorings.
Looks like CRT go for roughly 100 a year over the entire country and hope the example will have an effect?
Sad unhappy little man. lol