The Association of Continuous Cruisers

[Guest]

Cowardly. That is all.

 

Possibly - but those of us who readily identify ourselves by boat name and other means such as posting location and boat photo's should always remember that they could at some point bump into somebody face to face on the cut. I think it is cowardly when done behind total anonymity.

 

In a couple of instances I can think of where I have had some quite heated discussions with people on here but when I have subsequently met the person concerned we have had a good laugh about what we have said to each other...........

Edited September 23, 2013 by The Dog House

[mrsmelly]

NABO...........IWA...........RBOA...........AOCC

Blimey how many more clubs are there that I am not going to join?

 

Hope it all goes well for you.

 

Tim

[Wanted]

That is exactly my policy.

'Shudders at the thought of you and nicknorman meeting up for some nocturnal activity'

[Nightwatch]

If it's still going in April I may consider joining.

[billS]

We are all in danger of losing a great opportunity here.

 

There is a great strength in unity, and the one thing that all members of this forum is a love of canals and boating. There is also a clear indication that existing waterway and boat-owner associations have agendas which in general, do not relect the beliefs and aspirations of the majority of CWDF members. I think it is correct to say that even the CWDF members who are also members of IWA, NABO etc are not voiciferous in their defence on here.

 

I think it is a great pity, that having engaged opinions and support within this forum, those who have been most vocal in promoting their views and in engaging with CRT, have decided to form an association to champion the interest of a specific group of boaters, whilst excluding and majority of forum users. Whilst their energy and commitment is laudable, the inability of the founders of the ACC to counter argument without resorting to personal insult does not bode well for the future of this group and their relationship with CRT.

 

I hoped, and still do hope, to see a new kind of organisation based on the membership of this forum, where points of engagement with CRT can be proposed, argued, voted on and presented to CRT as a view voted on by an auditable number of licence holders. I understand the Swiss run their local authorities something like this. There would be room within such an organisation for specific interest sub-forums and groups, but all interested parties would be engaged.

Edited September 23, 2013 by billS

[Dave_P]

 

Possibly - but those of us who readily identify ourselves by boat name and other means such as posting location and boat photo's should always remember that they could at some point bump into somebody face to face on the cut. I think it is cowardly when done behind total anonymity.

 

In a couple of instances I can think of where I have had some quite heated discussions with people on here but when I have subsequently met the person concerned we have had a good laugh about what we have said to each other...........

and what of those who you would have met but actively avoided you because of the posts you've made on here?

[nicknorman]

Interesting that as you read down the page it says the process for the new organisation began in January.

 

I have thought about this situation a lot since reading this thread and posting my feelings about what has happened.

 

As I stated in the first place I have no issue with a new organisation representing CCers. As I said at the start I wish the organisation well. But I can't see the point of joining such an organisation as an associate member. I will stick with the membership I have.

 

However, I still can't get rid of my dissappointment at how we have got to this point and what to me feels like a hidden agenda compared to the stated intentions and ethos of "we are all boaters together". It may not be a very nice thought but I still do feel somewhat conned. It is also very distasteful that anything against what has happened has been met with such aggression from some. This won't help the new organisation.

 

I am not flouncing off either.

But surely there is nothing to stop you taking up the task and forming an all-boater association yourself? I find it hard to understand how there can be so much criticism for someone else failing to do what you want them to, when you could do it yourself.

[bizzard]

NABO...........IWA...........RBOA...........AOCC

Blimey how many more clubs are there that I am not going to join?

 

Hope it all goes well for you.

 

Tim

ACIB Association of continuously inebriated boozers.

[mrsmelly]

We are all in danger of losing a great opportunity here.

 

There is a great strength in unity, and the one thing that all members of this forum is a love of canals and boating. There is also a clear indication that existing waterway and boat-owner associations have agendas which in general, do not relect the beliefs and aspirations of the majority of CWDF members. I think it is correct to say that even the CWDF members who are also members of IWA, NABO etc are not voiciferous in their defence on here.

 

I think it is a great pity, that having engaged opinions and support within this forum, those who have been most vocal in promoting their views and in engaging with CRT, have decided to form an association to champion the interest of a specific group of boaters, whilst excluding and majority of forum users. Whilst their energy and commitment is laudable, the inability of the founders of the ACC to counter argument without resorting to personal insult, does not bode well for the future of this group and their relationship with CRT.

 

I hoped, and still do hope, to see a new kind of organisation based on the membership of this forum, where points of engagement with CRT can be proposed, argued, voted on and presented to CRT as a view voted on by an auditable number of licence holders. I understand the Swiss run their local authorities something like this. There would be room within such an organisation for specific interest sub-forums and groups, but all interested parties would be engaged.

Greenie awarded. Whilst i have no problem at all with minority groups forming clubs I think a blanket group to include all members of the forum WHO WISH to join would be a great idea. Perhaps you could start one?

 

Tim

[Guest]

and what of those who you would have met but actively avoided you because of the posts you've made on here?

 

So be it that's more an issue for them than it is for me - people however who do actually meet some of the most argumentative posters on here normally comment that they are actually an OK person in real life.

[mrsmelly]

 

So be it that's more an issue for them than it is for me - people however who do actually meet some of the most argumentative posters on here normally comment that they are actually an OK person in real life.

I agree with Martin. I have met him on a few occasions and believe it or not he is a Fine Chap....even though he tries not to appear so at times

 

Tim

[Jean]

I assume taking a winter mooring will not exclude you, or I suspect several of the founder members will be excluded!

 

I am struggling to understand just how many issues are actually perceived to be CC-er specific, rather than "live-aboard" specific though.

It would depend where you are moored. As a genuine continuous cruiser, the issues that affect us are: post restante availability, getting repeat prescriptions, dental appointments, boat upkeep, getting new bank cards (usually takes a week) and a whole load of other issues. To deal with most of these things you need to be within walking distance of a town. Currently the mindset of CRT is to turn all 'popular' VMs which include towns into 48hr moorings. So if I have a dental appointment which requires a return visit in a weeks time, I have to go away and then hope when I get back there is space for me to moor etc, That is to say they don't but a 'no return' restriction on them..

[nicknorman]

We are all in danger of losing a great opportunity here.There is a great strength in unity, and the one thing that all members of this forum is a love of canals and boating. There is also a clear indication that existing waterway and boat-owner associations have agendas which in general, do not relect the beliefs and aspirations of the majority of CWDF members. I think it is correct to say that even the CWDF members who are also members of IWA, NABO etc are not voiciferous in their defence on here.I think it is a great pity, that having engaged opinions and support within this forum, those who have been most vocal in promoting their views and in engaging with CRT, have decided to form an association to champion the interest of a specific group of boaters, whilst excluding and majority of forum users. Whilst their energy and commitment is laudable, the inability of the founders of the ACC to counter argument without resorting to personal insult, does not bode well for the future of this group and their relationship with CRT.I hoped, and still do hope, to see a new kind of organisation based on the membership of this forum, where points of engagement with CRT can be proposed, argued, voted on and presented to CRT as a view voted on by an auditable number of licence holders. I understand the Swiss run their local authorities something like this. There would be room within such an organisation for specific interest sub-forums and groups, but all interested parties would be engaged.

As a design engineer I know that trying to design something to be all things to all people is a recipe for disaster. The more closely you tie it down, the more successful it is. Hence the success of the iPad over windows 8 tablet.

 

So an all-encompassing boaters group, whilst a noble idea, would be a difficult if not impossible trick to pull off. As clearly demonstrated by IWA, NABO etc. Whereas making a smaller and more focused group successful is a much more realistic proposition, even if its not such an idealistic one.

[Dave_P]

I agree with Martin. I have met him on a few occasions and believe it or not he is a Fine Chap....even though he tries not to appear so at times

 

Tim

Trying desperately not to make this personal... but if someone is a 'fine chap' then why would they want to appear otherwise online? The only good explanation I can think of is trolling. If there's another, I'd be glad to hear it.

[Paul's Nulife4-2]

Hi gang,

We'll,,I think that the core ideas & intentions of such an association is good,I've just read there web site, & ime actually FOR anyone or anything (don't really care what it's called),so long as its proven to ACTUALLY ACT for the good of its members.

& i think , that such a 'voice' could help maintain,improve or secure my chosen lifestyle,,then yes,they would get my membership & vote.

But on a personal note,I do have a bit of a dilemma,my lifestyle was also swayed (25yrs ago now) by the notion of being able to live without ¬ get involved with all this policing , legislation , Policy making , & Memberships malarkey..but it has finally dawned on me,that the possibility is becoming very real,that without one,you can't have the other.

Anyway,I will let you all carry on now,its actually a good debate,just look ay the pages clock up,I just hope some actual good comes from it.

Cheers for now.happy chugging.

[carlt]

It would depend where you are moored. As a genuine continuous cruiser, the issues that affect us are: post restante availability, getting repeat prescriptions, dental appointments, boat upkeep, getting new bank cards (usually takes a week) and a whole load of other issues.

All issues that affected me when I lived on a LT mooring that didn't have a postal address for 8 years.

[Guest]

Trying desperately not to make this personal... but if someone is a 'fine chap' then why would they want to appear otherwise online? The only good explanation I can think of is trolling. If there's another, I'd be glad to hear it.

 

You are making the mistake of taking Tim's post too literally I don't consciously try to appear that way - it's just that I and some others on here are quite forthright, opinionated and argumentative in our postings, and to some that appears as being unpleasant.

 

I can often be the same face to face when the situation requires it but the internet is a one dimensional communication medium and as a result we don't see facial expressions, or hear tone of voice etc. thus sometimes posts come across not always in the way intended.

 

plus there are some forum members (in this and other forums) who sometimes go out of their way to be offended just for the sheer hell of it...

[HappyBunny]

John, I'm guessing that you are feeling a bit bashed by a couple of people that you respect and would like to have in agreeance with you. I don't think anybody was directing their feelings to you as a person, maybe how they perceive that things have been dealt with?

 

For what it's worth I see the formation of this group as a progression that has evolved from the work that you have done previously.

 

More importantly I think it would be a travesty to loose you as a forum member, hang in there, it'll be worth it!

 

Well said

[carlt]

 

 

 

plus there are some forum members (in this and other forums) who sometimes go out of their way to be offended just for the sheer hell of it...

That remark was totally uncalled for and I have reported your post to the moderators.

[Guest]

That remark was totally uncalled for and I have reported your post to the moderators.

 

[Timleech]

Currently the mindset of CRT is to turn all 'popular' VMs which include towns into 48hr moorings. So if I have a dental appointment which requires a return visit in a weeks time, I have to go away and then hope when I get back there is space for me to moor etc, That is to say they don't but a 'no return' restriction on them..

 

This is something which can affect a great many boaters, as Madcat has pointed out, it's not particularly an issue for CCers.

 

I don't want to get into the arguments about whether the new exclusive association is a good idea etc., but I do think one ongoing issue for them will be how to decide who is eligible for membership, how to filter out the CMers and bridge hoppers. Will there be a committee do decide borderline cases?

 

Tim

[Sir Nibble]

Well I am starting the John Sloan supporters club. This bloke has engaged in all goodwill at considerable personal expense to the try and push the interests of all boaters. The fact that he starts an association for one set of boaters does not impinge upon other boaters in any negative respect and indeed could be to the benefit of all. This is a perfect example of engaged citizenship and if the cake he has baked is not to your taste then you are perfectly at liberty to make your own.

[churchward]

As a design engineer I know that trying to design something to be all things to all people is a recipe for disaster. The more closely you tie it down, the more successful it is. Hence the success of the iPad over windows 8 tablet.

 

So an all-encompassing boaters group, whilst a noble idea, would be a difficult if not impossible trick to pull off. As clearly demonstrated by IWA, NABO etc. Whereas making a smaller and more focused group successful is a much more realistic proposition, even if its not such an idealistic one.

Yes indeed the IWA has only been in existance since 1946 what a complete failure!

[billS]

 

As a design engineer I know that trying to design something to be all things to all people is a recipe for disaster. The more closely you tie it down, the more successful it is. Hence the success of the iPad over windows 8 tablet.

 

So an all-encompassing boaters group, whilst a noble idea, would be a difficult if not impossible trick to pull off. As clearly demonstrated by IWA, NABO etc. Whereas making a smaller and more focused group successful is a much more realistic proposition, even if its not such an idealistic one.

I think it could work along the following lines.

 

If you you have CRT licence and are a member of CWDF, then you are 1 voter, using a single email address.

 

A discussion arises on the forum. A proposal is made. It is agreed to have merit and seconded by say 5 other members, then it is put to a vote on the forum. The 10 proposals which have the highest numbers of votes are presented to CRT at quarterly meetings, with the legitimacy that each vote = 1 licence.

 

There is no heirachy, and no agenda.

Edited September 23, 2013 by billS

[Ssscrudddy]

 

 

I think it could work along the following lines.

 

If you you have CRT licence and are a member of CWDF, then you are 1 voter, using a single email address.

 

A discussion arises on the forum. A proposal is made. It is agreed to have merit and seconded by say 5 other members, then it is put to a vote on the forum. The 10 proposals which have the highest numnbers of votes are presented to CRT at quarterly meetings, with the legitimacy that each vote = 1 licence.

 

There is no heirachy, and no agenda.

I dont see why you would have to be a member here