Explains my electrical system which is like no other

[Athy]

11 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

You were lucky to only get 'shirty'.

 

Joins the foum, in a matter of weeks is appointed a moderator, has a breakdown, removes posts, makes extremely derogatory comments about people, then deletes them and denies they were ever said, not knowing that several of us actually kept copies.

A nasty piece of work.

This is not a universally held view: if you look at Jo's profile you'll find that she has an excellent reputation and has amassed over 900  greenoes, proof that she i8s a very -popular forum member.

So, perhaps members who seem intent on adversely criticising her should ask themselves if everyone is out of step except them, and if some people who continually try to find fault may be "nasty pieces of work" themselves.

[Arthur Marshall]

21 minutes ago, Chris John said:

On the thread that was removed I commented about how badly the forum was moderated. One of the “moderators” (a term I use lightly) then felt the need to be critical because I’d made a slight typo (very childish) Really? I’m mean come on these are the ones that should be setting an example by not letting bullying be published and not being critical of others who may have inabilities. 
I’ll say it again this is a poorly moderated forum who’s moderators constantly let threads go totally off track and allow bickering and bullying of others. 
Yes I don’t have to look at the forum but I am and will continue to. I await the criticism of this post (no doubt from “moderators”) 

A certain sense of humour is required to survive any forum. Athy made a joke rather than a criticism, if I recall, while defending the mods' position.

Part of the joy of this one is the way threads wander and you'd probably be the first to complain about heavy handed modding if every irrelevance (like this one  for instance, which has nowt to do with the OP, or even this thread) got squished. Bickering is an internet norm, bullying does usually get dealt with.

As Tony says, if you recall the abuse and nastiness that arose some years ago before Thunderboat was set up, you might have a different view.

Of course, you could always start yet another thread about the modding and see how many agree with you instead of trying to hijack this one. iIRC, last time it turned out most of us appreciated it and the way it was done.

[Alan de Enfield]

40 minutes ago, Athy said:

This is not a universally held view: if you look at Jo's profile you'll find that she has an excellent reputation and has amassed over 900  greenoes, proof that she i8s a very -popular forum member.

 

 

If you actually dig down into the 'reputations' given to Lady G, it is not quite as rosy as you suggest.

The thing to remember is that, unlike in the old software, even when a 'negative' (angry / unimpressed) greenie is given it is counted as a 'postive' reputation.

You need to look at what greenies have been given - you could have 900 'negative' greenies and be very unpopular, but if you don't dig deeper you could think that it meant you were popular.

 

Of LadyG's 950 'greenies' 103 are actually negative' given as her posts are disliked

Her negative greenie count to postive greenie count is 11%

 

 

Apparently I am also thought badly of by some forum members, and, have also received some 'negative' greenies.

My Greenie count is 8078 of which 80 are negative or post 'disliked'

My negative greenie count to positive greenie count is 0.1%

 

I think comparing the ratios are self explanatory.

 

Simply comparing greenies given excludes any variable due to length of membership and total number of posts made.

 

Edit to add :

Before the suggestion arises that I have stalked and given lady G all of her negative greenies :

 

In the last 11 years on forum membershiop I have only issued a total of 11 'negative greenies' (8 angry and 3 unimpressed) and I do not recall that any were directed to Lady G

Edited May 16, 2021 by Alan de Enfield

[Athy]

2 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

I think comparing the ratios are self explanatory.

 

 

You make a good point, and indeed they show that Lady G is very popular and that you are even more so.

I must raise the point about negative marks counting as greenoes with the management, thanks for pointing that out.

[Alan de Enfield]

 

 

duplication

Edited May 16, 2021 by Alan de Enfield

[Alan de Enfield]

3 minutes ago, Athy said:

I must raise the point about negative marks counting as greenoes with the management, thanks for pointing that out.

 

It would be interesting to find out anyway.

My brain isn't awake enough to add up all the 'big numbers'.

[restlessnomad]

1 hour ago, Chris John said:

On the thread that was removed I commented about how badly the forum was moderated. One of the “moderators” (a term I use lightly) then felt the need to be critical because I’d made a slight typo (very childish) Really? I’m mean come on these are the ones that should be setting an example by not letting bullying be published and not being critical of others who may have inabilities. 
I’ll say it again this is a poorly moderated forum who’s moderators constantly let threads go totally off track and allow bickering and bullying of others. 
Yes I don’t have to look at the forum but I am and will continue to. I await the criticism of this post (no doubt from “moderators”) 

this forum caters to very niche market, and it will be stupid to moderate it heavily, because then people will stop posting and forum will die.

there is no such thing as 'on topic' here, which is again good for increasing traffic and engagement with user.

 

I too have complain against moderators (they dont intervene enough when things go bad) but its a difficult thing to achieve, so I am happy the way it is. Moderators are human too, plus they dont get paid, I am grateful for what they do, and have not seen any mod going out of line.

[Tracy D'arth]

15 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

If you actually dig down into the 'reputations' given to Lady G, it is not quite as rosy as you suggest.

The thing to remember is that, unlike in the old software, even when a 'negative' (angry / unimpressed) greenie is given it is counted as a 'postive' reputation.

You need to look at what greenies have been given - you could have 900 'negative' greenies and be very unpopular, but if you don't dig deeper you could think that it meant you were popular.

 

Of LadyG's 950 'greenies' 103 are actually negative' given as her posts are disliked

Her negative greenie count to postive greenie count is 11%

 

 

Apparently I am also thought badly of by some forum members, and, have also received some 'negative' greenies.

My Greenie count is 8078 of which 80 are negative or post 'disliked'

My negative greenie count to positive greenie count is 0.1%

 

I think comparing the ratios are self explanatory.

 

Simply comparing greenies given excludes any variable due to length of membership and total number of posts made.

 

Edit to add :

Before the suggestion arises that I have stalked and given lady G all of her negative greenies :

 

In the last 11 years on forum membershiop I have only issued a total of 11 'negative greenies' (8 angry and 3 unimpressed) and I do not recall that any were directed to Lady G

 

 

Thank you Alan for that analysis, never thought of doing that. On that basis I am not as bad as folk make out.

What should be considered but cannot be counted is the number of real greenies given to others commenting negatively to the original posts, that would be even more interesting.

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, Tracy D'arth said:

Thank you Alan for that analysis, never thought of doing that. On that basis I am not as bad as folk make out.

 

 

No you are not, we have had our differences but on engineering you are 'the tops'.

[Tracy D'arth]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

No you are not, we have had our differences but on engineering you are 'the tops'.

 You earned a proper greenie there Alan & I took you off ignore as we seem to have been in agreement more often recently.  T'D

[MrsM]

I didn't realise that the angry or unimpressed ones were negative! For example if X posts that someone has just rammed their boat and they are furious my instinct would be to respond with an angry face to show that I was angry on their behalf. Are the shock horror ones negative too because I get quite a few of those? ?

[Chagall]

12 hours ago, The Happy Nomad said:

 

Have you considered the possibility you might be wrong?

 

If you help somebody and they display haplessenes as you put it in response just dont post. It really is quite simple.

 

Sorry, I didn't reply earlier to your question....Indeed I have, and I am often wrong but in this instance Im not quite sure what you you think I am wrong about?   Wrong in continuing to post trying to help, as others have done and are still doing so?   

[Jerra]

I am going to make a suggestion based on complete ignorance so I am sure somebody will correct me.

 

As I understand things the situation is:

 

1.  The system on Lady G's boat was working.

 

2.  Batteries at the bow were replaced.

 

3.  Somewhere along the line during the work a charger/inverter was removed.

 

4.  The batteries now aren't being charged (or not charged enough).

 

Correct?

 

Surely the simplest answer is to get another charger/inverter and restore what was the status quo.

 

What am I missing/not understanding?

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Chagall said:

Sorry, I didn't reply earlier to your question....Indeed I have, and I am often wrong but in this instance Im not quite sure what you you think I am wrong about?   Wrong in continuing to post trying to help, as others have done and are still doing so?   

 

You seemed to be indicating I had participated in the recent on going 'bullying' of LadyG and/or that I dont 'ignore' certain posts and or posters?

[Chagall]

Just now, The Happy Nomad said:

 

You seemed to be indicating I had participated in the recent on going 'bullying' of LadyG and/or that I dont 'ignore' certain posts and or posters?

Oh I see, no I wasn't. 

[Murflynn]

32 minutes ago, Jerra said:

I am going to make a suggestion based on complete ignorance so I am sure somebody will correct me.

 

As I understand things the situation is:

 

1.  The system on Lady G's boat was working.

 

2.  Batteries at the bow were replaced.

 

3.  Somewhere along the line during the work a charger/inverter was removed.

 

4.  The batteries now aren't being charged (or not charged enough).

 

Correct?

 

Surely the simplest answer is to get another charger/inverter and restore what was the status quo.

 

What am I missing/not understanding?

 

have you not learnt that anything involving the good lady soon becomes incredibly complicated?

 

even the title of her thread confirms the view that, in her mind, nothing ain't simple.  

[Tony Brooks]

1 hour ago, Jerra said:

I am going to make a suggestion based on complete ignorance so I am sure somebody will correct me.

 

As I understand things the situation is:

 

1.  The system on Lady G's boat was working.

 

2.  Batteries at the bow were replaced.

 

3.  Somewhere along the line during the work a charger/inverter was removed.

 

4.  The batteries now aren't being charged (or not charged enough).

 

Correct?

 

Surely the simplest answer is to get another charger/inverter and restore what was the status quo.

 

What am I missing/not understanding?

 

Alan, that would work if she was on a shoreline but she is out cruising AND I have just been told the inverter she has is connected to the front bank and if so what you suggest is a no-no. If this is correct the that inverter will need moving to the rear, a lead running up the boat and then I have pointed her to a 4 amp, what looks like a two stage charger costing £14.99  from Screwfix. That would probably solve all her issues but she might have to turn the charger off when less than about 5 amps was being supplied by the solar and the engine is not running.

 

FWIW I am in PM correspondence with her.

[alistair1537]

I'm of the opinion that trying to solve problems over forums is usually a protracted and dubious affair. Most tradesmen are capable and being "on-site" is worth a hundred helpers on a forum. Do yourself a favour and get references from members of the forum or if needed, references from the tradesmen themselves. Certainly ask for certification along with a written quote.

If they back out at that stage, you're better off.

[Tony Brooks]

1 minute ago, alistair1537 said:

I'm of the opinion that trying to solve problems over forums is usually a protracted and dubious affair. Most tradesmen are capable and being "on-site" is worth a hundred helpers on a forum. Do yourself a favour and get references from members of the forum or if needed, references from the tradesmen themselves. Certainly ask for certification along with a written quote.

If they back out at that stage, you're better off.

 

She has a tradesperson she seems to trust coming mid week.

[Chagall]

7 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

Alan, that would work if she was on a shoreline but she is out cruising AND I have just been told the inverter she has is connected to the front bank and if so what you suggest is a no-no. If this is correct the that inverter will need moving to the rear, a lead running up the boat and then I have pointed her to a 4 amp, what looks like a two stage charger costing £14.99  from Screwfix. That would probably solve all her issues but she might have to turn the charger off when less than about 5 amps was being supplied by the solar and the engine is not running.

 

FWIW I am in PM correspondence with her.

Good, and that you are making headway with her. Well done for persevering, and I hope the tradesman (Kev?) continues to be trustworthy. 

[tree monkey]

1 hour ago, MrsM said:

I didn't realise that the angry or unimpressed ones were negative! For example if X posts that someone has just rammed their boat and they are furious my instinct would be to respond with an angry face to show that I was angry on their behalf. Are the shock horror ones negative too because I get quite a few of those? ?

There isn't a negative greeny as such, as you suggest the angry face could be used in the way you suggest, others may use it in another way.

We did have a "down vote" red button for a while but it got removed because it got a bit silly

[Alan de Enfield]

6 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

There isn't a negative greeny as such, as you suggest the angry face could be used in the way you suggest, others may use it in another way.

We did have a "down vote" red button for a while but it got removed because it got a bit silly

 

Try giving an angry greenie and see if the count changes.

If it could be used as a positive it would add to count.

 

Having had time to do some more experimentation it would appear I was actually wrong and the horror, sad and unimpressed ones don't add to the count.

But my original percentage calculations still stand.

Edited May 16, 2021 by Alan de Enfield

[Arthur Marshall]

The electrics on my boat were deemed fine for 20 years. Wires were getting a bit rough so I got a boat electrican to rewirethe engine and control panel. Passed the Cert. Next inspector said he didn't understand the wiring so made me get someone to redo the whole lot. Now I don't understand the wiring but that doesn't seem to matter. And mine's just a 12v system.

I've never yet met a boat tech expert who didn't either leave me a job to do myself after they'd gone to finish it, or I had to get another expert to do it. And I mean ever, in thirty years on the boat. Maybe we should have a thread of expert's cockups...

[nb Innisfree]

9 minutes ago, alistair1537 said:

I'm of the opinion that trying to solve problems over forums is usually a protracted and dubious affair. 

If you ask for advice you get any number of different views, to decide which one to follow you need to first gen up on the subject, when you have done that you'll prob have enough knowledge to decide who's advice is best, if you gen up a bit more you can solve that problem yourself! 

[Chagall]

3 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

There isn't a negative greeny as such, as you suggest the angry face could be used in the way you suggest, others may use it in another way.

We did have a "down vote" red button for a while but it got removed because it got a bit silly

It did!     Likewise the laughing face can be used as laughing with or at, its always tricky to know for sure which is being signalled!  ?