Ccer's - Rebranding

[nicknorman]

So, as you seem to have slept well Nick, let's gently go back to the source of this spat

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is what I read (in black) and heard in my head (in red)

 

Were you compliant with the law (bet you weren't)? Or just clever enough (cheating scumbag) to keep yourself "off the radar" (you devious bastard)?

 

The phrases that you used, although I'm sure you claim are innocently accurate, carry massive judgemental weight. That's what got you the response

 

Richard

Well that is a lot of filling in between the lines. Its one interpretation of course, but not the one intended. When sending out global emails at work, it never failed to amaze me that whilst 99% of people interpreted them as intended, there would often be one or two who managed to find an unintended meaning to which they could take great exception. But it was usually the same few people, and in the end I stopped bothering about not upsetting them because I realised its virtually impossible to make the written word completely unambiguous to those determined to be offended.

 

From your post I take it than any questioning of anyone's actions will carry a presumption that I consider them to be a cheating devious scumbag bastard. Its going to be tricky to do anything other than agree with everything anyone says.

This 11 second vid sums up how Nick works! I'll let you guess who is who.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LMLGuOkK6w

Sometimes, yes. But other times, no. And not in this case.

[carlt]

Sometimes, yes. But other times, no. And not in this case.

Really?

 

 

With fear and dread of starting the same old arguments again, surely you were using your boat bona fida for a residence, with the navigation bit a side issue that you had to comply with? In other words your boat's primary use was as your home, its secondary use which you could have taken or left, was for travelling round (a very limited) part of the system.

 

Were you compliant with the law? Or just clever enough to keep yourself "off the radar"?

You start your first sentence predicting the ensuing row so you knew full well that what you were typing was provocative.

 

You follow with a rhetorical question implying that I was not abiding by the law.

 

You then clarify your "question" with a statement that clearly suggests I was not following the rules.

 

You finish with a question loaded to start an argument.

 

All your pleading of innocence does not convince me that your post was a barely disguised accusation against me to which I offered a reasoned, polite response.

Edited July 31, 2013 by carlt

[DeanS]

2271 views this thread has had...and it's mostly been off topic.

[carlt]

2271 views this thread has had...and it's mostly been off topic.

Folk love a row.

 

Actually I think a row about whether or not someone has accused another member of breaking the ccing laws is not so far off topic.

[kris88]

Nicknorman in introspective mode is a bit scary, please go back to your normal argumentative self

Regards kris

[LoneWolf]

Folk love a row.

 

Actually I think a row about whether or not someone has accused another member of breaking the ccing laws is not so far off topic.

 

I dont - I only looked at this thread this morning cos I thought Richard & I were having a discussion about the practicalities of discovering what an acceptable cruising pattern is but I see is has been drowned out by the usual picky bickering about who said what and what was meant. For 3 more pages.

Dull, dull, dull - I'm going back to lurking

[carlt]

 

I dont - I only looked at this thread this morning cos I thought Richard & I were having a discussion about the practicalities of discovering what an acceptable cruising pattern is but I see is has been drowned out by the usual picky bickering about who said what and what was meant. For 3 more pages.

Dull, dull, dull - I'm going back to lurking

Perhaps if Nicknorman had decided to accuse you of breaking the law you might have spent time defending yourself...

 

Bye

[LoneWolf]

Perhaps if Nicknorman had decided to accuse you of breaking the law you might have spent time defending yourself...

 

Bye

 

Or I might have just told him he was talking bollocks as there was no way of him knowing my cruising pattern and declined to discuss it further with him.

Personally, I think that if one can explain ones case sufficiently then there is no need to continue a discussion with someone who is determined to take a meaning that was not there in any post. But then i am quite lazy

 

Now i'm asking myself why i'm even bothering with this reply. If it would stop raining I'd go out & have some fun instead

[Chris Pink]

Petard comes to mind

 

The hostility I refer to is not evidenced on the canal, but there are some very unkind comments on this and related threads which leads me to conclude that there is a proportion of contributors that the word hostile would accurately describe.

 

Not wishing to provoke anyone further, simply stating my perception of some of the things that I have read. It's a subject that is of interest to me, having wanted for so long to be a "Continuous Cruiser" whilst still fit enough to get around. After that its either a marina or the land.

Then, enjoy.

 

There's plenty of 'unkind' on here, it's that kind of place.

 

Do not confuse with the real world.

 

- just as an example, exactly how much hostility did you experience in your 350 miles?

Edited July 31, 2013 by Chris Pink

[carlt]

 

Or I might have just told him he was talking bollocks as there was no way of him knowing my cruising pattern and declined to discuss it further with him.

I didn't respond for his benefit.

 

I don't care one jot what he thinks but if he is accusing me of breaking the law, on a public forum, then I will defend myself.

 

Aside from that I believe my experience is worth relating as it proves that you can continuously cruise to the satisfaction of the authority and hold down a full time job, something that is frequently disputed.

 

I believe my response was valid and on topic regardless of the motives of the person I was responding to.

[Chris Pink]

..

Edited July 31, 2013 by Chris Pink

[churchward]

2271 views this thread has had...and it's mostly been off topic.

Quite. Let's get back on topic.

 

I think the branding of holders of CC licences would be excessively cruel and probably breaks EU Human rights laws!

[carlt]

 

I think the branding of holders of CC licences would be excessively cruel and probably breaks EU Human rights laws!

Possibly but strong branding could make them more popular.

[churchward]

Possibly but strong branding could make them more popular.

You sure? Have you seen a branding iron they have to get them pretty hot you know!

[carlt]

You sure? Have you seen a branding iron they have to get them pretty hot you know!

They cool down and the blistering goes away...eventually.

[churchward]

They cool down and the blistering goes away...eventually.

Yeh why am I worrying. let's do it.

[Wanted]

My thoughts were more about how some should internally rebrand how cc'ers are viewed however some learning from this thread means that my views have changed a little.

 

I suspect that there is already a view in the real world that boaters are the guardians of the waterways and maybe it's just in the inter-web that people seek to divide.

 

Be good to one another!

[junior]

 

but I see is has been drowned out by the usual picky bickering about who said what and what was meant. For 3 more pages.

Dull, dull, dull - I'm going back to lurking

 

The flip side to that is that i think it's great entertainment, much better than watching 'Doctors' and 'Place in the Sun'.

[Jigsawged]

The flip side to that is that i think it's great entertainment, much better than watching 'Doctors' and 'Place in the Sun'.

 

You have time to watch TV?

[Steilsteven]

 

 

I hope it doesn't make him go blind.

That just earned you that greenie

[Dovetail]

 

 

How about: CCer spends 6 months moving around 25 miles. 14 days in each 'place'. CCer then turns the boat around and retraces his/ her steps. Anyone have a problem with that?

 

 

That’s pretty much what I have done for the past nine years approaching ten apart from the odd excursion a bit further afield. Its never been a problem but me thinks times they are a changing.

 

I am proud to tell people I hold a CC licence but only move 25-30 miles up and down the same stretch of canal.

 

Re branding who needs that only responding to a few people who would argue about the time of day if there was nothing else to complain about.

[mayalld]

Having recently joined the forum, I find that I am likely to become part of a group (CCers) against whom there is a good deal of hostility. Many posters seem to confuse CCing with CMing but tar all with the same brush. I am sure that we are not alone and that there are many bona fide CCers who have not been motivated by getting something for nothing, not having to pay marina fees etc. but simply to enjoy, whilst we are still able, the wonderful inland waterways that we have been helping to support for 30 years.

 

I think you are mistaken.

 

Firstly there is very little hostility towards CCers on the forum. There is a degree of hostility towards those who claim to be CCers who don't stick to the rules (NCCCers or CMers).

 

Secondly there is very little confusion about the difference between the two in the minds of the majority of posters. It suits a small number of posters who support those who break the rules to try to create an impression that people are confused

[Doodlebug]

From the arguments between CCs, Permanent mooring holders and those who live in houses you'd think we should have a separate forum for each group!

 

I would say that if your a narrowboater because you like boats, your on this forum. If your on a narrowboat because its cheap and you break the rules then I doubt you would be active in the forum and community.

 

People do what they want to do, and what suits them best. Some like CCing, some like having a permanent place to be. Everyone has a different situation.

 

I would hate staying in one place for half the year. If I had a permanent mooring, (and enough money) I would need at least 6 dotted around the canal system. And I bet if I did that people would complain that i'm stealing all the space!

[tillergirl]

 

I can see your point. And you're right, I'm new, wasn't aware that the 'abuse' of the system was so blatant.

 

How about: CCer spends 6 months moving around 25 miles. 14 days in each 'place'. CCer then turns the boat around and retraces his/ her steps. Anyone have a problem with that?

So are you saying we need not have covered 668 miles this year (so far.............)?

[MtB]

 

I dont - I only looked at this thread this morning cos I thought Richard & I were having a discussion about the practicalities of discovering what an acceptable cruising pattern is but I see is has been drowned out by the usual picky bickering about who said what and what was meant. For 3 more pages.

Dull, dull, dull - I'm going back to lurking

 

Totslly agree.

 

I just screen out carlt's and Nicknorman's posts these days. Dull dull dull.

 

No doubt they'll screen out mine too now. Fine with me!

 

MtB