Official - BWAHMs are not normal

[luctor et emergo]

Still trying to work out what BWAHMs are - but I did have a "very merry Christmas". Hope you all did too

 

 

 

Dave

 

I thought it was Jonatan Ross introducing the well known composer..

Edited December 26, 2012 by luctor et emergo

[alan_fincher]

I think the implication was that moronical marina bosses respond with violence when criticised!

 

As for Orph Mable, well I've met the guy, and he is an extremely amiable and helpful person, who wites the best column on the site. He is not a moron; calling him one says more about the person using the term.

I can only assume that some heavy editing of some posts must have occurred before I saw or posted in this thread, then?

 

I can currently see no evidence of anybody calling Orph Mable a moron, nor the bit about anybody responding with violence.

 

I stand by my comment that Orph Mable has on at least one occasion made great play about the accuracy of information on the NBW site, and Victor's desire that it be objective and true, (my words, as I couldn't find his posts when I tried to).

 

Anybody who has tried to get erroneous articles corrected will know that to be total nonsense - Victor is interested in a headline far more than total accuracy.

 

The difference with CWDF is that you can post what you like without an editor deciding what appears and does not. It is inevitable for this very reason that CWDF itself contains vast amounts of twaddle, some of it probably moronic twaddle - (... now wait and see this quoted without the context on another site! ).

 

But on CWDF if you think something is twaddle, (or worse), you can say so quite freely, and put the alternate case - provided only that you stick within some fairly basic forum rules.

[rgreg]

"Normal" boaters (well three or four of them) flood the postbag with their outrage.

 

http://www.narrowboatworld.com/index.php/news-flash/5243-continuous-moorers-must-be-sorted

 

And watch out all you liveaboards on leisure moorings - you're nexy on the list for a pitchfork armed visit from the normal boaters.

Well I've read and re-read this article and can't see anything contentious in it. All I read are comments from people wanting something done about people who claim to CC and extract the urine. I can't see anything there against anyone who wants to stick to the rules; to me the criticism of the article is just the same old "they're having a go at abusers so that means they're having a go at anybody who CCs".

[Rich]

I have actually just tried to find some specific discussion that went on on that site about its journalistic integrity, as the one I'm thinking of just about said it all - unfortunately I have failed to do so - their search facilities seem not to be that great, unless there are tricks to using them that I don't know.

 

Alan, if you put "alan fincher narrowboatworld" into Google you will find a few references. Is the one you were looking for there?

 

I think the implication was that moronical marina bosses respond with violence when criticised!

 

Blimey, how the heck did you arrive at that?

 

But on CWDF if you think something is twaddle, (or worse), you can say so quite freely, and put the alternate case - provided only that you stick within some fairly basic forum rules.

 

Hmm, yes.

[matty40s]

One of the issues I have with NBW is that they(victor) never change or alter anything after publication, even when the mistooks are painted out.

 

I pointed out a glaring error in an article title to Allan(one of the better contributors most of the time) and the title was never changed. As Allan Fincher states, other errors, either geographical, factual or namewise are also not changed, so it seems to be publish and be damned, not accept constructive critisism and correct before more people read the mistakes.

 

I am not allowed to join their club, I must have done something wrong at some point, and I feel that I see far more of the waterways than most of their contributors..........all year round. I like to praise CaRT for their successes along with reporting events and yes, occasionally knocking them, however, I will always try to suggest a better way, unlike NBW.

Edited December 26, 2012 by matty40s

[PiRSqwared]

Well I've read and re-read this article and can't see anything contentious in it. All I read are comments from people wanting something done about people who claim to CC and extract the urine. I can't see anything there against anyone who wants to stick to the rules; to me the criticism of the article is just the same old "they're having a go at abusers so that means they're having a go at anybody who CCs".

 

The use of the word "normal" infers that those who do not conform to these peoples' view are abnormal...or should that be subnormal?

 

These people hide behind the "rules" but at the heart of their outlook is a complex combination of envy, frustration and impotence. Unless everyone on the cut pays the same as they do and behaves in the same way as they do, they will always feel a need that something must be done - hence the raising of the issue of liveaboards on leisure moorings. The fact that their wet dream is just that is not a hindrence to them expressing their feelings of being hard done by.

[jenlyn]

The use of the word "normal" infers that those who do not conform to these peoples' view are abnormal...or should that be subnormal?

 

These people hide behind the "rules" but at the heart of their outlook is a complex combination of envy, frustration and impotence. Unless everyone on the cut pays the same as they do and behaves in the same way as they do, they will always feel a need that something must be done - hence the raising of the issue of liveaboards on leisure moorings. The fact that their wet dream is just that is not a hindrence to them expressing their feelings of being hard done by.

Green one for that. Pretty good summary.

[Rich]

The use of the word "normal" infers that those who do not conform to these peoples' view are abnormal...or should that be subnormal?

 

Surely "normal" in this instance refers to the many thousands of boaters who, when out cruising, abide by the rules governing the length of time spent moored up, whether on visitor moorings or out in the country. They are the norm, therefore normal.

 

I don't really have a problem with the boat moored out in the sticks somewhere for weeks on end. It makes no difference to me in any way. What I do object to is the boat on visitor moorings in popular spots, Nantwich for instance, that are there for days on end, or the boat left on service moorings or lock moorings. These instances make life difficult for others and are down to selfishness.

 

I can't get upset about liveaboards on leisure/longterm moorings either. It doesn't affect me but some people do get upset and object to the practice. Even in the state this poor country is in this is allowed. Perhaps the objectors could take a leaf out of their books and try it themselves. They will then see all the advantages.

[jenlyn]

Surely "normal" in this instance refers to the many thousands of boaters who, when out cruising, abide by the rules governing the length of time spent moored up, whether on visitor moorings or out in the country. They are the norm, therefore normal.

 

I don't really have a problem with the boat moored out in the sticks somewhere for weeks on end. It makes no difference to me in any way. What I do object to is the boat on visitor moorings in popular spots, Nantwich for instance, that are there for days on end, or the boat left on service moorings or lock moorings. These instances make life difficult for others and are down to selfishness.

 

I can't get upset about liveaboards on leisure/longterm moorings either. It doesn't affect me but some people do get upset and object to the practice. Even in the state this poor country is in this is allowed. Perhaps the objectors could take a leaf out of their books and try it themselves. They will then see all the advantages.

Name them. Take pictures. I keep hearing the stories, but never get any evidence.

Edited December 26, 2012 by jenlyn

[rgreg]

Surely "normal" in this instance refers to the many thousands of boaters who, when out cruising, abide by the rules governing the length of time spent moored up, whether on visitor moorings or out in the country. They are the norm, therefore normal.

 

 

That was exactly my interpretation. To me it's irrelevant whether they are liveaboards, continuous cruisers, or leisure boaters I would expect any boater who sticks to the rules to be the "norm" (normal), conformist. Meanings can always be twisted, just as some do with the rules.

[Psycloud]

I've yet to meet anyone in life who sticks to all the rules, no matter how pious thy may appear. Bending rules, including fighting against something you don't agree with, is how we as a species have evolved to where we are now and how as a nation have progressed (not in the eyes of everyone I'm sure) to be as free as we are. Let he who has never done 35 in a 30, or she who has not given it some welly on an open stretch of the cut, cast the first stone.

 

EDIT: I should add that by choosing to become a boater, even with a marina mooring, I am deliberately bending some of societies rules about what is normal

Edited December 26, 2012 by Psycloud

[John Holden]

I can only assume that some heavy editing of some posts must have occurred before I saw or posted in this thread, then?

 

Alan, my comment "I think the implication was that moronical marina bosses respond with violence when criticised!" was in response to a comment along the lines of "you'd better watch out if you criticise the editor of NBW".

[luctor et emergo]

Recently I was taken to task by a number of people on this forum for daring to suggest that someone was/is obnoxious, and part of the thread was removed. I would have thought that the above comments were far more objectionable than anything I had written.

 

If you don't like the site don't read it. It has become de rigueur on CWDF to run it down as not worth bothering with. But it does rather beg the question "How do you know".

 

Should you ever be in the area of the Staffs and Worcs between Autherley Junction and Aldersley Junction pop into Oxley Marine and inform the boss that he is a moron who writes twaddle.

 

 

 

Alan, it is the last paragraph in the above quote that it refers to.

 

[Hmm, have I just done a 'Tilbury' here?]

[carlt]

Can't be bothered edit.

Edited December 27, 2012 by carlt

[Mac of Cygnet]

I can only assume that some heavy editing of some posts must have occurred before I saw or posted in this thread, then?

 

I can currently see no evidence of anybody calling Orph Mable a moron,

 

Wanted said:

 

Twaddle written by morons.

(For which he has since apologised)

 

I have indeed tried to get an article corrected, without success, but did get an e-mail from Tom Crossley with some sort of explanation.

 

I'm not trying to defend NBW, although I don't think all of it is totally beyond the pale; I just think that contributers to CWDF are doing this site no favours by the intemperate language used in this thread. The mods apparently agree - at least two similar threads have been closed down for this reason.

[Wanted]

Wanted said:

 

(For which he has since apologised)

 

I have indeed tried to get an article corrected, without success, but did get an e-mail from Tom Crossley with some sort of explanation.

 

I'm not trying to defend NBW, although I don't think all of it is totally beyond the pale; I just think that contributers to CWDF are doing this site no favours by the intemperate language used in this thread. The mods apparently agree - at least two similar threads have been closed down for this reason.

 

To put some context to my post, I have never met Piers Morgan but feel like I am not alone in thinking he is indeed a moron, I have not met this chap but I happily accept that he is a sound fellow, I guess this poses the question of how far we can rightfully condem those that publicly offer their opinion. For me, it's fair game, for others it would appear not.

I don't make it a habit of calling people a moron without cause which is why I have retracted that bit. But I do retain the belief that overall I think that NBW is moronic twaddle, in much the same way as The Daily Mail or the Independant I paper.

 

Other opinions are available

[Mac of Cygnet]

To put some context to my post, I have never met Piers Morgan but feel like I am not alone in thinking he is indeed a moron, I have not met this chap but I happily accept that he is a sound fellow, I guess this poses the question of how far we can rightfully condem those that publicly offer their opinion. For me, it's fair game, for others it would appear not.

I don't make it a habit of calling people a moron without cause which is why I have retracted that bit. But I do retain the belief that overall I think that NBW is moronic twaddle, in much the same way as The Daily Mail or the Independant I paper.

 

Other opinions are available

 

Well it's a question of 'sweeping statements' or 'tarring with the same brush' isn't it? Just as a casual observer of some mooring sites may conclude that 'boaters are messy antisocial ne'erdowells' - see another thread running at the moment. Just as NBW has at least two good columnists, the Daily Mail (last time I looked) some reasonable writers and a good cartoonist and the Independant I paper - well I've only seen it once, but the crossword was OK(ish).

[PiRSqwared]

The flow of guff dressed up as common sense would seem to have no off switch...

 

 

My link

[Rich]

The flow of guff dressed up as common sense would seem to have no off switch...

 

 

My link

I reckon you're right there but the link spoiled it.