Best boat at Crick Show?

[The Anonymous Bard]

Stuart who runs Barnowl is a good friend of mine and he's aware how out of date his website is, the guy who currently looks after his website charges a stupid amount of money for every update he makes to the website. Stuart has asked me to look into setting up a fully content managed website for him, so that he can keep the site upto date and at no extra cost.

 

Thanks Sarahavfc for confirming that.

 

I honestly can't see many people associating an outdated detail on a web page with the quality or attention to detail of the builders work but i'm pleased that you cleared that particular point up if only for the record.

 

There is a wider point to all of this too...

 

No sooner had Barnowl been announced as Crick Favourite Boat 2010 and were probably considering where to display their hard earned and deserved silverware, an opinion appears in a canal forum that then attempts to make an association between the builders attention to detail and an outdated detail on a web page.

 

Appreciating that we all have our opinions and we all reserve the right to air them, would it not be better where there is more at stake, namely the good work and reputation of a builder, to reserve these opinions and comments until a time that they can be supported with accompanying, substantiated facts instead of the highly speculative comment that was made?

 

It must be difficult enough already for the builders who, despite the ongoing economic difficulties, continue to display for us at shows regardless of their reasons for doing so (and let's face it they give us a show each year which we look forward to and enjoy) and they are to a degree putting themselves on a pedestal only to be shot at by opinion and it must be a very dis-heartening feeling to then learn of things like this when all of your hard work and effort has just been rewarded with the accolade of the favourite boat.

 

Well done Barnowl on a deserved win and hope to see you next year too!

Edited June 4, 2010 by The Anonymous Bard

[Guest]

OK my last word on this as I'm sure folk will be getting a bit bored now, I know I am.

 

I honestly can't see many people associating an outdated detail on a web page

 

This is where our opinions differ - but it's nice to see the companies having something done about it.

 

Your implication that this was some sort of cheap 'pop' at Barnowl whilst they bask in the glory of their Crick win was unfair. I offered an opinion based on what I might think if I came at the site particularly if I was unaware of their success at Crick this year.

 

Appreciating that we all have our opinions and we all reserve the right to air them, would it not be better where there is more at stake, namely the good work and reputation of a builder, to reserve these opinions and comments until a time that they can be supported with accompanying, substantiated facts instead of the highly speculative comment that was made?

 

But the facts were substantiated - the info. on the web page was out of date - fact. I offered an opinion as to how that might be interpreted. Something which you rightly point out we are entitled to do in here.

Edited June 4, 2010 by NB No Deadlines

[The Anonymous Bard]

OK my last word on this as I'm sure folk will be getting a bit bored now, I know I am.

 

 

 

This is where our opinions differ - but it's nice to see the companies having something done about it.

 

Your implication that this was some sort of cheap 'pop' at Barnowl whilst they bask in the glory of their Crick win was unfair. I offered an opinion based on what I might think if I came at the site particularly if I was unaware of their success at Crick this year.

 

 

 

But the facts were substantiated - the info. on the web page was out of date - fact. I offered an opinion as to how that might be interpreted. Something which you rightly point out we are entitled to do in here.

 

There was no implication of a cheap pop, just facts.

 

The fact was not substantiated by you that there may be a link between an out of date detail on a web page and the builders integrity, yes there was an out of date detail on the web page but that wasn't the issue.

 

The following are your own words from post 90...

 

"The difference is somebody might see my display name and think 'what a numpty he doesn't do grammar properly and not read my posts, where as if you see a builder can't be arsed to update a simple aspect of their website for three years I always think what else can't they be arsed to sort...."

 

From the latter part of that quote the following words are taken...

 

"where as if you see a builder can't be arsed to update a simple aspect of their website for three years I always think what else can't they be arsed to sort...."

 

It lacks something doesn't it, namely the words "might not" in place of "can't" and as it transpired and was confirmed by somebody who knows the builder the reason wasn't that the builder couldn't "be arsed" as you had put it.

 

It's ok to say what things you are pedantic about but charity often begins at home, that was the whole point earlier in the thread about sometimes being tolerant instead of pedantic as sometimes people have to withstand the same level of scrutiny that they apply to others and it always looks better if the levels are roughly the same.

[Albion]

I honestly can't see many people associating an outdated detail on a web page with the quality or attention to detail of the builders work

snipped

 

I agree with Nb ND to some extent. An out of date web site doesn't give a good impression. In the same way as a scruffy dirty cluttered workshop wouldn't give a good impression if you visited. If you are researching a potential new builder these little things can affect your opinion and they say that sometimes impressions are formed in the first few seconds. Let's just put it this way, it is better to have an up-to-date web site and a clean workshop than not. I have just given my boat builder a gentle dig about their web site which, due to a problem with the web design program, has scruffy photos and unlabeled page buttons. One of the partners agreed with me that it didn't give a good impression and ought to be improved. You make these criticisms because you want the company to do well and, sometimes, the owners are too close to the whole thing to see it how an outside, unconnected, customer would see it.

This is a general point by the way and no added criticism of the boat builder that has been discussed as I don't know their product and haven't viewed their site.

Roger

[The Anonymous Bard]

I agree with Nb ND to some extent. An out of date web site doesn't give a good impression. In the same way as a scruffy dirty cluttered workshop wouldn't give a good impression if you visited. If you are researching a potential new builder these little things can affect your opinion and they say that sometimes impressions are formed in the first few seconds. Let's just put it this way, it is better to have an up-to-date web site and a clean workshop than not. I have just given my boat builder a gentle dig about their web site which, due to a problem with the web design program, has scruffy photos and unlabeled page buttons. One of the partners agreed with me that it didn't give a good impression and ought to be improved. You make these criticisms because you want the company to do well and, sometimes, the owners are too close to the whole thing to see it how an outside, unconnected, customer would see it.

This is a general point by the way and no added criticism of the boat builder that has been discussed as I don't know their product and haven't viewed their site.

Roger

 

I agree with both Martin and yourself on that point.

 

What I wouldn't do is then write the words "where as if you see a builder can't be arsed ..."

 

That is a statement of fact which then turned out to be incorrect.

 

Pedantic of me?

 

Yes, totally as i'm sure that wasn't what Martin really meant but a good demonstration of what I said earlier in the post that sometimes tolerance can be king over pedantic and no matter how pedantic you might be over an issue there is always some corner where a person might not withstand the same level of scrutiny without displaying some level of contradiction.