Considerate Boater

[NB Alnwick]

Fortunately I was near enough to an empty waste paper bin not to put too much vomit on the carpet.

 

I really cannot see why many, apparently sensible, contributors to these forums are so keen to dismiss the concept of being a 'considerate boater' - surely that is exactly what we all should aspire to?

 

How can a website dedicated to "considerate boating on UK inland waterways" be anything but a benefit? Unless, of course, the critics feel that it is their right to behave inconsiderately towards other waterway users!

 

A tad patronising it may be but as I have said before, if anyone disagrees with the content or style of the 'Considerate Boater' website, then the most sensible (and most considerate) course of action would be to take the matter up with the author(s) and there is a useful contact page that can be used for this purpose.

 

For the record, I have no connection with the authors or publishers but I believe that what they are attempting to achieve deserves our support and respect . . .

[Chris-B]

I really cannot see why many, apparently sensible, contributors to these forums are so keen to dismiss the concept of being a 'considerate boater' - surely that is exactly what we all should aspire to?

 

How can a website dedicated to "considerate boating on UK inland waterways" be anything but a benefit? Unless, of course, the critics feel that it is their right to behave inconsiderately towards other waterway users!

 

A tad patronising it may be but as I have said before, if anyone disagrees with the content or style of the 'Considerate Boater' website, then the most sensible (and most considerate) course of action would be to take the matter up with the author(s) and there is a useful contact page that can be used for this purpose.

 

For the record, I have no connection with the authors or publishers but I believe that what they are attempting to achieve deserves our support and respect . . .

 

My comments Graham are based on the positively nausea inducing endorsements on the web page

YES I do agree that manners and courtesy are declining on the canals as they have done in general BUT is it really necessary for an organisation such as BW to give this such credence ?

 

Chris

[Guest]

I'm tempted to email Considerate Boater, and ask them how the hirers of a company here on the North Oxford can all be Considerate Boaters, even if it's the first time they've ever seen a narrowboat!

 

The stickers were in the window of all the ones from that company that we saw- even though the hirers didn't send anyone ahead to help with the lock we were all queuing for...

 

Why can't hirers aspire to be considerate boaters?? -

 

they might not appear to achieve it due to lack of experience (though some might - remember not all hirers are doing this boating thing for the first or second time) but it shouldn't stop them aspiring to be one.

[rgreg]

I'm tempted to email Considerate Boater, and ask them how the hirers of a company here on the North Oxford can all be Considerate Boaters, even if it's the first time they've ever seen a narrowboat!

 

The stickers were in the window of all the ones from that company that we saw- even though the hirers didn't send anyone ahead to help with the lock we were all queuing for...

 

I find hirers usually only too keen to help, and very often are more "considerate" than some private boaters

[drunkensailor]

I think the thing that annoys everyone is not the idea that we should behave with courtesy to each other, but that we should be being sent a leaflet telling us to be so.

[RLWP]

I really cannot see why many, apparently sensible, contributors to these forums are so keen to dismiss the concept of being a 'considerate boater' - surely that is exactly what we all should aspire to?

 

How can a website dedicated to "considerate boating on UK inland waterways" be anything but a benefit? Unless, of course, the critics feel that it is their right to behave inconsiderately towards other waterway users!

 

A tad patronising it may be but as I have said before, if anyone disagrees with the content or style of the 'Considerate Boater' website, then the most sensible (and most considerate) course of action would be to take the matter up with the author(s) and there is a useful contact page that can be used for this purpose.

 

For the record, I have no connection with the authors or publishers but I believe that what they are attempting to achieve deserves our support and respect . . .

 

Difficult, that one Graham. Yes, of course, who's going to argue that being an inconsiderate boater is the way forward? Well, no-one of course. So therefore we should all support this sanctimonious crap from the "Considerate Boater" website. Otherwise we are all in favour of rudeness and anarchy

 

Richard

[carlt]

I really cannot see why many, apparently sensible, contributors to these forums are so keen to dismiss the concept of being a 'considerate boater' - surely that is exactly what we all should aspire to?

Sorry Graham but there is nothing useful in the site that isn't in the Boaters' Handbook, and other sources, and I'm afraid their 4 point mantra:

 

 

Contains nothing relevant to being a considerate boater.

 

I have met totally inconsiderate boaters whose rictus grin and fake wave never falters, as they carry on their way, oblivious to the chaos their behaviour has caused.

Edited August 14, 2010 by carlt

[Guest]

Sorry Graham but there is nothing useful in the site that isn't in the Boaters' Handbook, and other sources, and I'm afraid their 4 point mantra:

 

There is as much an anti CB mantra developing on here as there is claimed to be in the CB information....

Edited August 14, 2010 by NB No Deadlines

[carlt]

There is as much an anti CB mantra developing on here as there is claimed to be in the CB information....

Not sure why you're quoting me.

 

If you could point to any posts I've made, recommending inconsiderate boating, then I will happily discuss them.

 

One example of my post was...We were refloating a sunken boat at Brinklow, by wrapping builder's plastic around the hull, to raise the watertight height to above the canal level (it was a working boat, sunk to about 3' above gunwale height).

 

We had put signs up. politely requesting boats to slow right down, so they didn't suck the plastic sheeting away.

 

A boat came past at high speed, occupants smiling and waving cheerily, as they passed, despite us imploring them to slow down.

 

Sure enough the plastic was dragged out of my hands and trailed after their boat, which ground to a halt as its prop clogged with polythene.

 

They had no idea what to do and I can assure you that I didn't wave or smile cheerily once, as I spent over an hour, with a bread knife, clearing their prop for them, whilst my friend went back to Travis Perkins to buy more rolls of Builders plastic.

 

Someone else might have waved and smiled cheerily, at them, and got on with the refloating job, whilst they stood scratching their heads, unable to fix their boat....most considerate.

[Guest]

Not sure why you're quoting me.

 

Simply because you referred to a 'mantra' and I was just making the point that those against the CB initiative seemed to chanting a 'mantra' too....

[magpie patrick]

I think Alnwick, the dislike of "considerate boater" comes from a few sources, or at least it does for me.

 

People don't like "self appointed guardians" and that's what CB is, I'll be honest, if the IWA set up a committee that came up with "guidance for considerate boating" even if it was exactly the same as this I'd be less cynical because (1) I'd regard it as within the IWA remit and (2) that committee would be answerable to the IWA council which in term are answerable to the membership

 

moving onto the guidance itself, it is somewhat gooey and honeyed, all this "give us a wave stuff". You can be considerate and surly, you can be friendly and the boater from hell. The "greet everything with a smile and a wave" grates because that ISN'T considerate boating

 

Third, you may have seen the correspondence here when the founder of CB was accused of being rude and officious. Whether he was may be a matter of debate but his grasp of what his own site actually said was laughable. That reflects on being self appointed, if I gave a response like that for the Coal Canal Society my committee would give me a serious grilling at the next committee meeting

 

Finally, the likes of Sally Ash endorsing this just makes it worse. Do you really think she agrees with everything they say, or do you think she's jumped on what she thinks is a band wagon that will make her and BW look good. Both CB and BW live in a bubble where they don't get enough experience of the outside world.

 

I'm surprised the IWA fell for it, the committee I'm on with them (Inland Waterways Freight Group) are a bit more worldly wise

[carlt]

Simply because you referred to a 'mantra' and I was just making the point that those against the CB initiative seemed to chanting a 'mantra' too....

Really?

 

Can't see it myself.

[Guest]

Really?

Can't see it myself.

 

Which bit?

 

That you refereed to a Mantra? or that in my opinion the anti CB stance on here is starting to sound a bit like a mantra...

[carlt]

Which bit?

 

That you refereed to a Mantra? or that in my opinion the anti CB stance on here is starting to sound a bit like a mantra...

I can't see where not appreciating being told how my demeanour should be is anything like a mantra.

[Guest]

I can't see where not appreciating being told how my demeanour should be is anything like a mantra.

 

Because of the repetitiveness.....

[carlt]

Because of the repetitiveness.....

Sorry but if people keep saying how great it is, surely those who object to its patronising, holier than thou stance, should be able to respond?

[Guest]

Sorry but if people keep saying how great it is, surely those who object to its patronising, holier than thou stance, should be able to respond?

 

Of course - but my original point was that the anti's (if we can defer to calling them that for a mo) on here were just repeating the same anti CB message and it was becoming a bit 'mantra' like and repetitive which is what you referred to the CB mob doing...

 

It wasn't a criticism of either stance just a simple observation....

[carlt]

Of course - but my original point was that the anti's (if we can defer to calling them that for a mo) on here were just repeating the same anti CB message and it was becoming a bit 'mantra' like and repetitive which is what you referred to the CB mob doing...

 

It wasn't a criticism of either stance just a simple observation....

I am not offering a list of ways I believe people should behave.

 

Nor am I "anti" considerate boating (small 'c').

[Guest]

I am not offering a list of ways I believe people should behave.

 

Nor am I "anti" considerate boating (small 'c').

 

Nor am I....

[alan_fincher]

I really cannot see why many, apparently sensible, contributors to these forums are so keen to dismiss the concept of being a 'considerate boater' - surely that is exactly what we all should aspire to?

You seem to have missed the difference between actually being a considerate boater, which I can't see anybody has dismissed, and which I think many do aspire to, with a web-site called "Considerate Boater" which I can't see adds anything at all to that process.

 

How can a website dedicated to "considerate boating on UK inland waterways" be anything but a benefit? Unless, of course, the critics feel that it is their right to behave inconsiderately towards other waterway users!

That's one hell of a bit of flawed logic. Of course most of us don't think it is their right to behave inconsiderately towards other waterway users, although I find the suggestion more absurd than insulting.

 

Perhaps we just think this is a very poor and dubious web-site, (and hence it is not, to use your term, "a benefit").

 

I couldn't see any value in it when I last looked, and given it's sanctimonious style, I can't imagine much of it has been changed in a positive way since then - the author seemed to far up his own backside to me.

 

Everything I saw on it is covered better elsewhere, so I can't see why this self appointed guardian of boating standards is achieving anything other than perhaps trying to get a bit of an ego trip out of the whole thing.

 

If I set up a web-site called "Considerate Motorist", but people look at it, and think I have done it very badly, then they are fully entitled to say so ? The fact that they choose to do so doesn't instantly make them inconsiderate motorists, does it ? They may just be considerate motorists who think my "Considerate Motorist" web-site is at the very least done much better by other people, and perhaps that it is really very poor indeed, and of no discernible benefit.

[carlt]

Nor am I....

No but you seem to be defending someone who is offering a list of ways in which we should behave.

[Guest]

No but you seem to be defending someone who is offering a list of ways in which we should behave.

 

I think I made the point of where I stand clear here-

 

It wasn't a criticism of either stance just a simple observation....

[carlt]

I think I made the point of where I stand clear here-

I do apologise. I thought you made the point of where you stand here-

 

Having read through this whole thread, I think many have been too quick to judge the 'Considerate Boater' website in a negative light. Clearly, a lot of hard work has gone into creating the website and I cannot believe that the only motive would have been a desire to feel important.

 

We all make mistakes from time to time and we can all create the wrong impression (often inadvertently) about ourselves - especially when our remarks or actions are viewed out of context. Also, those of us who are prepared to put things down in writing will always attract criticism from those who may hold a different view - that doesn't necessarily mean that one is right and the other is wrong!

 

Perhaps Steve Vaughan can benefit from some of our comments - especially if those comments are made constructively. If we simply dismiss his work then, equally he may choose to dismiss the views of the many experienced contributors to the Canal World Discussion Forums - then nobody wins and a lot of hard work will have been wasted.

 

Very eloquently put (way better than I could have put it anyway)

[Guest]

I do apologise. I thought you made the point of where you stand here-

 

I've clearly been persuaded by the equally eloquent and well constructed arguments of the likes of yourself that I should perhaps moderate my views and offer are more balanced view....

 

either that or I'm just fickle....

 

who knows, who really cares....???

Edited August 15, 2010 by NB No Deadlines

[carlt]

who knows, who really cares....???

Well I obviously do....or I wouldn't find it worth debating with you.

 

As to the subject matter, well that is irrelevant, it is just a topic to hang a discussion on.