Flying items due to passing boats

[mayalld]

You are full of yourself today arent you David?

 

I try on a daily basis to emulate your own shining example in this department.

 

I am resigned to always failing.

[Terence]

For those not well versed in Phylis-speak, I will translate;

 

"No matter what the results, I will claim victory, because if the results go the way I want them to, it proves my point, and if they don't people are voting just to try and make me wrong, so I will claim victory... Or I might just decide that I can't turn the results to my advantage in an argument, at which point I will claim that I need a few days, and then I hope you will forget all about this poll"

 

Hello David (now I know your name it's nice to address you as such)

 

Am I right in thinking, that at the moment Phylis is winning this Poll? or have I missed something?

 

Thanks,

Terence

[Naughty Cal]

Hello David (now I know your name it's nice to address you as such)

 

Am I right in thinking, that at the moment Phylis is winning this Poll? or have I missed something?

 

Thanks,

Terence

 

Are you trying to tip him over the edge

[mayalld]

Hello David (now I know your name it's nice to address you as such)

 

Am I right in thinking, that at the moment Phylis is winning this Poll? or have I missed something?

 

Thanks,

Terence

 

My name is in the signature at the bottom of every post. Most people (except my parents) call me Dave, but I'm not precious about it.

 

Yes, Phylis is "winning" this poll in so far as a majority goes.

 

The problem for Phylis (who isn't really called Phylis BTW) is that her argument isn't that the majority have never experienced these problems. Here argument is that only a tiny number have, and that an overwhelming majority have not. The poll isn't supporting that view, so in terms of proving what she was saying, she is losing,

[Naughty Cal]

My name is in the signature at the bottom of every post. Most people (except my parents) call me Dave, but I'm not precious about it.

 

Yes, Phylis is "winning" this poll in so far as a majority goes.

 

The problem for Phylis (who isn't really called Phylis BTW) is that her argument isn't that the majority have never experienced these problems. Here argument is that only a tiny number have, and that an overwhelming majority have not. The poll isn't supporting that view, so in terms of proving what she was saying, she is losing,

 

May i refer you back to your own post number 49.

 

Does it sound familiar?

[mayalld]

May i refer you back to your own post number 49.

 

Does it sound familiar?

 

 

Nope.

 

You started a poll that you should have known would NEVER give you the results that would back your farciacal assertion that the overwhelming majority of boaters have never had problems.

 

Very silly of you really.

 

[Edit to add missing word]

Edited July 29, 2011 by mayalld

[Naughty Cal]

Nope.

 

You started a poll that you should have known would NEVER give you the results that would back your farciacal assertion that the majority of boaters have never had problems.

 

Very silly of you really.

 

May i refer you back to your post number 49?

 

Does it sound familiar?

[AlanH]

Nope.

 

You started a poll that you should have known would NEVER give you the results that would back your farciacal assertion that the majority of boaters have never had problems.

 

Very silly of you really.

I don't understand. It seems to show exactly that at the moment.

[mayalld]

May i refer you back to your post number 49?

 

Does it sound familiar?

 

You posted a poll that could NEVER produce a clear result.

 

repeating the same stuff over and over again won't change that.

 

I don't understand. It seems to show exactly that at the moment.

 

I apologise. I left a word out.

 

Phylis asserts that the overwhelming majority have no problems. The poll doesn't show that.

[Naughty Cal]

You posted a poll that could NEVER produce a clear result.

 

repeating the same stuff over and over again won't change that.

 

 

 

Shall i try with simpler words for you?

 

You insisted that whatever the result i would try and explain why i was right, yet David dear, you seem to be doing exactly the same thing yourself.

 

Is that better? Can you understand this now?

 

I think he is heading over the edge you know

 

I apologise. I left a word out.

 

Phylis asserts that the overwhelming majority have no problems. The poll doesn't show that.

 

Yet.

 

Leave the poll longer and the percentage of votes that were untrue and petty will eventually be filtered out as the percentage of members who have voted increases.

[gary955]

Ahh The fun has moved over to here now!

I must say, I'm begining to rather like Phylis

[cotswoldsman]

For those not well versed in Phylis-speak, I will translate;

 

"No matter what the results, I will claim victory, because if the results go the way I want them to, it proves my point, and if they don't people are voting just to try and make me wrong, so I will claim victory... Or I might just decide that I can't turn the results to my advantage in an argument, at which point I will claim that I need a few days, and then I hope you will forget all about this poll"

 

Sounds to me that Phylis would walk into the job at No.10

 

My problem now is should I leave my vote the way it was or change it to prove Dave wrong, life is so stressful!!!

[Naughty Cal]

BUMP

[mayalld]

Shall i try with simpler words for you?

 

You insisted that whatever the result i would try and explain why i was right, yet David dear, you seem to be doing exactly the same thing yourself.

 

Is that better? Can you understand this now?

 

 

Yes, and I understood it from the very beginning.

 

There is one minor difference.

 

Actually, no, there is one gaping chasm of a difference.

 

YOU (yes you, the speed-freak from Shefield) created the poll, with the intention of proving that what you said was true.

 

I suggested that come what may, you would find ways of saying that it did exactly that, regardless of what the results were, and it has proved to be the case.

 

I don't have to do anything to the results to prove my point. My point is proven by your politician-like interpretation of the results to agree with your position, by the simple expedient of forgetting exactly what your original position was, and I simply demonstrate that the results are so open to interpretation as to be meaningless in proving that position.

[Naughty Cal]

Yes, and I understood it from the very beginning.

 

There is one minor difference.

 

Actually, no, there is one gaping chasm of a difference.

 

YOU (yes you, the speed-freak from Shefield) created the poll, with the intention of proving that what you said was true.

 

I suggested that come what may, you would find ways of saying that it did exactly that, regardless of what the results were, and it has proved to be the case.

 

I don't have to do anything to the results to prove my point. My point is proven by your politician-like interpretation of the results to agree with your position, by the simple expedient of forgetting exactly what your original position was, and I simply demonstrate that the results are so open to interpretation as to be meaningless in proving that position.

 

You have not managed to unknot your knickers over the weekend then?

[alan_fincher]

Actually, I think that unless the high percentage of votes is driven solely by the urge to not let Phylis be proved correct, the result is far from inconclusive.

 

It would seem to me to indicate pretty definitively that a lot of people probably really do need to either learn to tie their boats up better, or find better places to moor, (or possibly even both).

 

I have moored enough canal boats in enough places over the years, and been passed by enough fast moving boats to be genuinely amazed if 40% or respondents have genuinely had stuff flying off of level surfaces. (Please tell me it IS the "Phylis factor" skewing the vote!.....)

 

(I couldn't bring myself to cast that "No" vote, (for obvious reasons!), so must own up to being an abstention!).

Edited August 1, 2011 by alan_fincher

[jonk]

I think that it might depend upon the boat that you are on to some extent? My present narrowboat of 57ft hardly moves whereas the last 30ft narrowboat that I borrowed moved quite a lot both while cutting wakes or from passing boats; in the 30ft we were careful to keep everything in places where falls were unlikely, in the 57ft we just didn't need to bother!

 

John

[Naughty Cal]

I think that it might depend upon the boat that you are on to some extent? My present narrowboat of 57ft hardly moves whereas the last 30ft narrowboat that I borrowed moved quite a lot both while cutting wakes or from passing boats; in the 30ft we were careful to keep everything in places where falls were unlikely, in the 57ft we just didn't need to bother!

 

John

 

We have a light weight 25ft boat with very little hull under the waterline yet we still manage to not have items casting themself to the floor.

[mayalld]

We have a light weight 25ft boat with very little hull under the waterline yet we still manage to not have items casting themself to the floor.

 

Take a step back.

 

People are reporting what they HAVE experienced (or indeed have not experienced). Your response is to attempt to argue that some experience of yours means that they cannot possibly have experienced what they claim to have experienced.

 

Nobody is telling you that simply because they have had things flying off shelves you must have, or calling you a liar for saying it hasn't happened to you. Why do not accord them the same courtesy, of accepting that their experiences differ from yours?

 

Actually, don't bother with the answer. I'm sure that everybody KNOWS what the answer to that question is.

[churchward]

Actually, I think that unless the high percentage of votes is driven solely by the urge to not let Phylis be proved correct, the result is far from inconclusive.

 

It would seem to me to indicate pretty definitively that a lot of people probably really do need to either learn to tie their boats up better, or find better places to moor, (or possibly even both).

 

I have moored enough canal boats in enough places over the years, and been passed by enough fast moving boats to be genuinely amazed if 40% or respondents have genuinely had stuff flying off of level surfaces. (Please tell me it IS the "Phylis factor" skewing the vote!.....)

 

(I couldn't bring myself to cast that "No" vote, (for obvious reasons!), so must own up to being an abstention!).

I am not sure why someone who voted yes has to justify themselves. However I did vote yes not particularly on the grounds of something flying off a surface although I did have something drop off the table due to motion caused by a passing boat. It is more that other things can happen. I did even have some of my morning conflakes in my lap due to a passing boat just as I was picking the bowl up from the table. OK not a disaster but an inconvenience caused by someone being selfish and wanting to go early morning water sking. I think it is just common decency to slow down pass boats due to the possibility that some may be inconvenienced or problem caused if you don't. I don't accept that it must be teh moorers fault for being in the wrong place or incorrectly tied up although all these factors won't help. We should all act with consideration for others the more that happens the more pleasant the cut could be.

 

I always slow down agreed not always to tick over as it depends on the conditions and size/depth of canal or river you are on.

[Naughty Cal]

Take a step back.

 

People are reporting what they HAVE experienced (or indeed have not experienced). Your response is to attempt to argue that some experience of yours means that they cannot possibly have experienced what they claim to have experienced.

 

Nobody is telling you that simply because they have had things flying off shelves you must have, or calling you a liar for saying it hasn't happened to you. Why do not accord them the same courtesy, of accepting that their experiences differ from yours?

 

Actually, don't bother with the answer. I'm sure that everybody KNOWS what the answer to that question is.

 

Take a step back.

 

Others are also reporting that they have not experienced things flying off shelves, despite many years of boat ownership. Are you suggesting that all of these people are liars as well?

[mayalld]

Take a step back.

 

Others are also reporting that they have not experienced things flying off shelves, despite many years of boat ownership. Are you suggesting that all of these people are liars as well?

 

No.

 

That would be because my position is that SOME people find that boats passing too fast causes them a problem.

 

I don't presume to suggest that an overwhelming majority find it a problem. Some people are moored in location where it isn't a problem, some have a higher tolerance etc. etc.

 

I merely say that boats passing too fast CAN cause a problem for a non-trivial proportion of moored boats.

 

If somebody says they don't experience a problem, then I accept that this is the case. I neither call them a liar, not call others a liar for saying that in similar circumstances they do experience a problem.

[Guest]

I am not sure why someone who voted yes has to justify themselves. However I did vote yes not particularly on the grounds of something flying off a surface although I did have something drop off the table due to motion caused by a passing boat.

 

I voted Yes because the answer to the question which was -

 

Have you ever suffered from items in your boat being thrown to the floor by passing boats whilst you have been moored up?

 

Because it is true we have had - OK the boat hit us too...but the honest answer to the question as it is written is yes.

[Naughty Cal]

No.

 

That would be because my position is that SOME people find that boats passing too fast causes them a problem.

 

I don't presume to suggest that an overwhelming majority find it a problem. Some people are moored in location where it isn't a problem, some have a higher tolerance etc. etc.

 

I merely say that boats passing too fast CAN cause a problem for a non-trivial proportion of moored boats.

 

If somebody says they don't experience a problem, then I accept that this is the case. I neither call them a liar, not call others a liar for saying that in similar circumstances they do experience a problem.

 

Excuse me if im wrong, but were you not accusing me of making the results suit my argument earlier in this topic? Seems you are doing a fairly good job of that yourself here David dear. You cant have it both ways.

[WotEver]

We have a light weight 25ft boat with very little hull under the waterline yet we still manage to not have items casting themself to the floor.

So what?

 

That is your experience.

 

It isn't mine.

 

Tony