Overcrowding

[Chris Pink]

Isn't joining this forum and asking questions actually part of many peoples' research?

 

indeed it is but flouncing off when people express ennui at a controversial topic being restarted from first principles isn't going to greatly further that research.

[David Schweizer]

I totally agree. And Braunston has a high proportion of people with either historic or quasi historic boats who think and act as if they own the waterways. Every time I have had to pass through B (sorry, I could not use the B word again) I have experienced bad manners and total rudeness and inconsiderate steering from one of these "historic or quasi historic" boat owners/stresses.

It almost seems to be a required trait if you own one of these boats.

But, away from B they mostly behave the same so it cannot be some invisible waves in the B area causing it. It has to be something emanating from the boats themselves.

Funny, I have never noticed that, perhaps it's because our boat was built in Braunston, and we have Bottom Lock Braunston on the side panels, so they think we are "locals"

[Evo]

The first 3 posts in this thread are comical...WTF is wrong with that guy.

[alan_fincher]

At the time we were informed by BW that Braunston Bottom Lock was officially the busiest lock on the system, with Bradford Town Lock being a close second.

I don't know who your BW source was, but did they define "busy" though ?

 

Officially BW count "lock usages", I think, because without a continual presence lock side, they could not count actual boats, (i.e. they can't know how often locks are shared, and how often contain one or even zero boats).

 

Certainly I recall recent years stats do not show the same level of usage at Braunston, (or at any GU locks) as at several other more popular locations.

 

It is often reckoned that by the time you allow for the (normally!) use of paired locks that Hillmorton is busiest. Certainly that's what the last stats I saw showed, (by a good margin).

 

I'm pretty certain that some T&M locks, (may have been Alrewas), well outstrip the usage at Braunston, as (IIRC) does Hurleston.

 

BTW - I hadn't realised that LM's definition of "busy" is "can I moor there". By that definition, I will accept that Braunston can be quite busy, although we have never ever failed to find any mooring there.

[twbm]

I totally agree. And Braunston has a high proportion of people with either historic or quasi historic boats who think and act as if they own the waterways. Every time I have had to pass through B (sorry, I could not use the B word again) I have experienced bad manners and total rudeness and inconsiderate steering from one of these "historic or quasi historic" boat owners/stresses.

It almost seems to be a required trait if you own one of these boats.

But, away from B they mostly behave the same so it cannot be some invisible waves in the B area causing it. It has to be something emanating from the boats themselves.

 

Being one of the apparently generically rude and inconsiderate folk associated with a 75 year old pair of boats that still carry commercially could I ask that you don't lump us all together and I'd be interested to hear what you consider inconsiderate steering: Having worked a pair both loaded and unloaded I never cease to be amazed at how folk think we can stop on a sixpence as they charge into bridge holes or cut across shallow bends to keep out of their way as they hug the middle with their 18 inch draft.

[john6767]

I for one like Braunston, and will be passing through/stopping their tomorrow afternoon all being well. There are a lot of boats moored and often quite a few moving, but it is only a small part of a cruise so a nice contrast to the open country.

We have rarely failed to find a mooring at Braunston, but time of arrival is important. Lunchtime is a disaster, but by early afternoon many of the lunchtime stoppers have moved on, It then begins to fill up quite quickly, but interestingly some boats seem to move off about 5pm.

We quite often leave Braunston at 5pm or so, having spent the afternoon in the pub or walking round. We prefer to moor in the country and will head back to around bridge 100 for some open country side for the night.

 

 

 

[Neil2]

I think some of the posters on this thread ought to remind themselves of the forum heading.

[mayalld]

Isn't joining this forum and asking questions actually part of many peoples' research?

 

Indeed, although I suspect that it is somebody researching group dynamics when a touchy subject is raised, rather than canals.

[David Schweizer]

I don't know who your BW source was, but did they define "busy" though ?

 

Officially BW count "lock usages", I think, because without a continual presence lock side, they could not count actual boats, (i.e. they can't know how often locks are shared, and how often contain one or even zero boats).

 

Certainly I recall recent years stats do not show the same level of usage at Braunston, (or at any GU locks) as at several other more popular locations.

 

It is often reckoned that by the time you allow for the (normally!) use of paired locks that Hillmorton is busiest. Certainly that's what the last stats I saw showed, (by a good margin).

 

I'm pretty certain that some T&M locks, (may have been Alrewas), well outstrip the usage at Braunston, as (IIRC) does Hurleston.

 

BTW - I hadn't realised that LM's definition of "busy" is "can I moor there". By that definition, I will accept that Braunston can be quite busy, although we have never ever failed to find any mooring there.

I have no idea what criteria were used to make the statement, all I know is that a BW official told us that at a local meeting about 13 years ago.

 

Of course I also had my own totally unscientific and anecdotal observations, and at the time, I would have said that there were more boat movements at Bradford during the week but more at Braunston at the weekends.

[carlt]

Eh? Strange forum this. Every time I ask a question I never get a straight answer or walk into a wall of abuse. I'm thinking boaters are in a mindset of their own, seems to be a closed shop attitude to any newbies.

 

Oh well.

if we were too welcoming think how overcrowded it would get

[Lady Muck]

Indeed, although I suspect that it is somebody researching group dynamics when a touchy subject is raised, rather than canals.

 

<passes tinfoil hat to Dave>

[Athy]

The most crowded bit of canal I've ever tried to get through was Fradley junction a few years ago, absolutely chocker as boats on the Coventry could noteven get through the swing bridge because of the queue of boats for the bottom lock. This may not by typical, as on another occasion we had got through relatively easily, but jeez, it was mayhem.

[mayalld]

<passes tinfoil hat to Dave>

 

Yes, of course it is a coincidence that a whole raft of newbies have joined and immediately headed for the controversial subjects.

 

The fact that somebody has the technical skills to hide it from the forum software doesn't change the fact that there are regular posters to CWDF running sockpuppet accounts to cause disruption.

[bottle]

Isn't joining this forum and asking questions actually part of many peoples' research?

 

Yes but it is obvious that with a little bit of effort they could research the forum and find the answer.

 

In the last week there have been a few new member that have jumped straight in to the most controversial discussions we keep going over.

 

Strange that.or am I getting cynical in my old age.

[Lady Muck]

Yes, of course it is a coincidence that a whole raft of newbies have joined and immediately headed for the controversial subjects.

 

The fact that somebody has the technical skills to hide it from the forum software doesn't change the fact that there are regular posters to CWDF running sockpuppet accounts to cause disruption.

 

Here we go again..... Most trolls can't be bothered to cloak their IP's etc, your favourite troll never bothered to do so.

 

There is such thing as coincidence.

Edited October 14, 2011 by Lady Muck

[carlt]

Yes but it is obvious that with a little bit of effort they could research the forum and find the answer.

True...wouldn't provoke discussion though, would it?

[Québec]

Yes but it is obvious that with a little bit of effort they could research the forum and find the answer.

In the last week there have been a few new member that have jumped straight in to the most controversial discussions we keep going over.

 

In many cases it's a lot of effort....and as a professional researcher I'm normally pretty good at finding things. And the logic of your position is that no one can ever ask a question that has already been asked and discussed.

Rather than simply saying - 'seek (via the search facility) and ye shall find'....the really helpful thing might be to point them in right direction and provide a link (as some do) to the thread in question.

 

Personally I don't mind 'repeat' questions..I can always choose not to read it, but even when it is going over old ground, there might be something new to learn. If we hadn't asked questions (most of which must have been asked before) when we bought a boat and first joined two years ago then we would have been up the K&A without a mooring! Yes, OK, it can be bit bruising on here sometimes, but I've learnt a hell of a lot, and have tried - when I can - to give something back.

 

Edited for typos

Edited October 14, 2011 by Québec

[Lady Muck]

and if you search the forum for these controversial discussions, you won't find any, because they've been removed. So how a noob is supposed to know that the topic is controversial, I don't know........

[MartinClark]

and if you search the forum for these controversial discussions, you won't find any, because they've been removed.

 

Why have they been removed? Are we not grown-up enough to read threads where people fall out over controversial topics?

[ditchcrawler]

In many cases it's a lot of effort....and as a professional researcher I'm normally pretty good at finding things. And the logic of your position is that no one can ever ask a question that has already been asked and discussed.

Rather than simply saying - 'seek (via the search facility) and ye shall find'....the really helpful thing might be to point them in right direction and provide a link (as some do) to the thread in question.

 

Personally I don't mind 'repeat' questions..I can always choose not to read it, but even when it is going over old ground, there might be something new to learn. If we hadn't asked questions (most of which must have been asked before) when we bought a boat and first joined two years ago then we would have been up the K&A without a mooring! Yes, OK, it can be bit bruising on here sometimes, but I've learnt a hell of a lot, and have tried - when I can - to give something back.

 

Edited for typos

I find the search function on here a pain in the whatsit. I can never find what I am looking for . Garry peacock use to have a link to a good search engine for the forum on the bottom of his posts.

[Lady Muck]

Why have they been removed? Are we not grown-up enough to read threads where people fall out over controversial topics?

 

Because once we'd removed the slander, abuse and accusations, there was nothing left.

[MartinClark]

I find the search function on here a pain in the whatsit. I can never find what I am looking for . Garry peacock use to have a link to a good search engine for the forum on the bottom of his posts.

 

It's here - [linky]. Bookmark it for later use!

Edited October 14, 2011 by MartinClark